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. Nakon 22:30, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Telly Awards (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)

This is an awards mill: people pay to receive an award, which is not evidence of either their or its notability (WP:PURCHASE). ALL of the references provided are to the organization's own website— apparently this is because there is no discussion of the awards in reliable independent secondary sources elsewhere, and the article has not attracted a single independent source since its inception over eight years ago. The existence of a Wikipedia article confers a legitimacy that the award does not have, and is free advertising that it does not warrant. Searches on Google et al. will produce a large number of hits, but if the reader looks closely he/ she will discover that these are all mentions in passing, not discussions of the award itself. Like the Accolade Competition, this award appears to exist only on its own hot air (which is substantial, but has no weight). It looks like the last nomination, by Enric Naval, ended when the nominator withdrew his nomination on the basis if WP:IAR, but even that discussion looked like it might have been headed for a delete. Arguments from that discussion in favor of keeping were based on WP:IKNOW, WP:GOOGLEHITS, WP:OTHERSTUFF, WP:MUSTBESOURCES, and WP:ASSERTN, none of which resulted in any reliable independent secondary sourcing being added to the article. KDS4444 (talk) 08:28, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I did a fairly conservative copyedit on this article recently to remove the worst of the promotional tone of the article. Another editor did a followup after that, but the concerns about primary sources and lack of notability remain.--Jeffro77 (talk) 11:07, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nomination and WP:PROMO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jobrot (talk • contribs) 16:26, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. clpo13_(talk) 20:18, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Fails to pass the WP:GNG criteria. I can find no independent coverage of this "award" in and of itself, apart from the canned press releases of those who have "won" it (the site even has a downloadable model press release). Note that like similar operations such as "The Global Music Awards" and "Hollywood Music in Media Awards", they occasionally make unsolicited awards to truly notable people/organizations to enhance the award's legitimacy. A quick glance at the articles that link to this "award", reveals multiple promo biographies of non-notable people that probably should also be deleted eventually. Voceditenore (talk) 05:25, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - non-notable pseudo-award, should have been deleted some time ago (like the previous AfD). There is no evidence whatsoever that they are notable in any way. --Orange Mike | Talk 05:45, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete at best as I myself reviewed this and found it questionable, still questionable at this time for solid notability improvements. SwisterTwister talk 00:24, 8 May 2016 (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.