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. ✗plicit 10:05, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Does not pass WP:GNG. The Wired article contains less than one hundred words of content dedicated to the subject. The Twin City Live source is a permanently dead video with less written prose than the Wired article. The Star Tribune article is mostly WP:INTERVIEW material and is therefore a primary source. Searching for sources that aren’t already being cited yields trivial mentions from NBC News, BusinessInsider (WP:BI), and Space.com but there are no in-depth sources that would demonstrate WP:SIGCOV or even provide useful information for writing an Encyclopedia article without WP:ORIGINAL research. The Space Frontier source says that the subject received the “2010 Best Presentation of Space Award”. The Space Frontier Foundation does have a Wikipedia page, but it only contains bare URLs to sources that, at a glance, don’t appear to demonstrate WP:N. I don’t think this article would qualify for WP:WEBCRIT despite the award, but either way WEBCRIT states that “In almost all cases, a thorough search for independent, third-party reliable sources will be successful for content meeting one or both of these criteria,” and I’m not seeing independent and reliable secondary sources that demonstrate notability. Jami Higginbotham, Cariann Higginbotham, Jared Head, and Ryan Caton don't have Wikipedia articles so there isn't really a place to merge the content. It's also worth noting that even if the hosts or guests were notable this show doesn't WP:INHERIT that notability. If someone is able to scrounge up some sources or if the award is notable enough to save the article it needs some cleanup considering only two out of the fifteen paragraphs in the body of the article even contain references.

I previously nominated this for deletion here, but there was WP:NOQUORUM and no prejudice against a speedy renomination. I also forgot to include in the previous nomination the fact that there is an article dedicated to a List of TMRO Space episodes, which should probably be deleted alongside this article. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:GNG per nom. A WP:BEFORE shows nothing beyond an article from Wired. SBKSPP (talk) 01:52, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no evidence of notability. Lembit Staan (talk) 15:44, 23 September 2021 (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.