The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ATV News (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

lack of notability Gnome84 14:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. New divisions of TV networks should be considered notable; hence there are articles on ABC News, CBS News, etc. In the alternative, it could be merged with Asia Television Limited, but I think the better choice would be to keep the article and let it develop as well. JamesAM 17:05, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Counter-Argument The news divisions of TV networks like the ones you mention are notable because their newsreaders are notable. When Peter Jennings of ABC News died, it made news. When CBS News fired Dan Rather it made news. However, as demonstrated in an AfD discussion a few weeks ago, NONE of the ATV News readers are notable. If they leave the air, no one notices or cares. To prove the counter-factual, can you find any reputable online sources about ATV News or its news readers?Gnome84 02:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not conceding that the notable of ATV News depends merely on whether its individual newsreaders are considered notable, but I'd like to point out that several newspeople do have Wikipedia articles noting their work for ATV. For example, Renato Reyes, Carmen Yip, Chan Pui Yee, Cheung Wai-tsz, Kaman Lee, Kwok Tse Ting. JamesAM 01:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment to the Comment Thanks for naming these non-notables, all of which are stubs. Why? Because no one has anything notable to attach to them. Admin should also delete each of these pages for the same reasons that admin deleted pages of their cohorts (like Edna Tse, Yonden Lhatoo, Nick Waters, and Anne-Marie Sim), which sprouted like weeds.Gnome84 15:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The author of the article needs to demonstrate notability with citations of other sources discussing the English-language division of ATV News - something not done so far. In Hong Kong, ATV News is a distant underdog to TVB. ATV's English language broadcasts target an addressable market of perhaps 100,000 native English-speaking residents. Of those, maybe a few hundred or a few thousand are regular viewers - ie the equivalent of any medium-sized town's public-access cable channels for announcing things like school-board meetings.

ATV's audience is so tiny it has never registered enough viewers to appear on any ratings chart.

By contrast, the Chinese-language version of ATV News has a much larger potential audience - about 60 times the size, and might be notable, but if so, should be in Wikipedia-Chinese, not English.Gnome84 07:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I disagree with your rationale here. First of all, the ATV News article asserts that ATV News provides news for both ATV World (English) and ATV Home (Cantonese). Therefore, your discussion of the relatively smaller audience for the English-language broadcast is irrelevant, because ATV News is described as responsible for both language broadcasts. Furthermore, I strongly disagree with your assertion that the English language Wikipedia should not have articles not include material on non-English broadcasts. English Wikipedia (like the Wikipedias in other languages) should provide its readers with information from around the world. JamesAM 18:39, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep as almost certainly notable but at present the parent article has more information. --Dhartung | Talk 22:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep If Wikipedia precedent is to have articles on news divisions of American television networks, than news divisions of Asian television networks should also be included. --Charlene 01:43, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• LOL I thought this would be a magazine aboutfour wheelers and other All Terrain Vehicles. Mandsford 02:16, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Strange reasoning. Should we also delete TASS news agency because it was in Russian? -- Fuzheado | Talk 11:15, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Counter-Argument TASS is a quasi-official news agency of the Russian government. Does Wikipedia-English also have articles on other Russian news agencies like Interfax and Ria Novosti It should. Why? Because the three major international wire services - AP, AFP, Reuters constantly cite or refer to TASS and Interfax. They are notable. What news services refer or cite to ATV News?--either in English or Chinese?Gnome84 02:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Fuzheado. This nomination is downright bizarre. Rebecca 12:15, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Counter-Argument to a "argument" To make a persuasive argument, you need to cite facts, examples, or authoritative sources. The main authoritative source in this regard is Wikipedia, which requires the subject of an article to be notable. None of you have demonstrated notability for ATV News although you have made a few analogies.Gnome84 02:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Just as notable as one of the Big Three network news. Those are not notable because their newsreaders are famous, they're notable because they reaach millions of people everyday. Abeg92contribs 18:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Counter-Argument: You've just contradicted yourself (if you note the messages above). ATV News does not reach millions of people every day.Gnome84 15:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.