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 delete. postdlf (talk) 19:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OwnagePranks[edit]

OwnagePranks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Just another YouTube channel. May have got some minor attention at Funny or Die and so on, but fails WP:GNG, WP:WEB and any number of other policies and/or guidelines. Shirt58 (talk) 11:48, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. In the end, there just isn't enough to really show notability for this YT channel. I can see where it's mentioned on the internet, but not in places that I would say can be used as a reliable source. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:34, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: After reading the article. Youtube can NOT be used as a refrence. Non-notible subject. NSlights^Talk 22:24, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I am not satisfied with the sources. In order for the author to keep this article he should put some authentic sources and Youtube by far is not an authentic source. Nefirious (talk) 18:33, 18 July 2013 (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.