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. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 00:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of programs broadcast by National Broadcasting Network[edit]

List of programs broadcast by National Broadcasting Network (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Article fails WP:NOT#DIRECTORY. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, Wikipedia articles are not Directories, directory entries or a electronic program guide Hu12 (talk) 12:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy keep. Selective application of Wikipedia policy. --Howard the Duck 14:16, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep same reason with AFD nomination for List of programs broadcast by Radio Philippines Network. -Danngarcia (talk) 14:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOT#DIRECTORY and WP:LISTS#Purpose of lists. Long lists of unreferenced redlinks are unhelpful to our readers. — Satori Son 15:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Keep. Argument is an example of systemic bias. English Wikipedia is not US/UK/Aus/CA/NZ-only Wikipedia. Starczamora (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. If we have list of programs broadcast by The WB then why not have a list of programs by NBN? Keep it if we have to keep other non-US/UK/Aus/CA/NZ lists. --Jojit (talk) 03:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. per my Policy based nom. Flawed and inapropriate Non-policy based arguments of regional and ethnic systemic bias do not make for exemption of official Wikipedia policy for which this was nominated. WP:NOT#DIRECTORY and WP:LISTS#Purpose of lists. If solid policy based reasonnig was being discussed, I may--Hu12 (talk) 18:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As nominator, your support for deletion is implicit - this is voting twice Vegetationlife (talk) 19:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect, a nominator can explicitly vote under the nomination. "Nominations imply a recommendation to delete the article unless the nominator specifically says otherwise....some nominators explicitly indicate their recommendation" If solid policy based argument discussions were being presented, you cannot assume that I would not have supported a vote of keep, or withdraw.--Hu12 (talk) 19:55, 7 February 2008 (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.