From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 09:22, 2 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Videocracy

Videocracy (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:GNG and WP:NOTNEO. The cited sources are passing mentions without significant coverage. Daask ( talk) 03:48, 4 January 2022 (UTC) reply

  • The first citation contains the word in its title, hardly a 'passing mention'. Malick78 ( talk) 09:34, 4 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 04:21, 11 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 12:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One last relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:52, 25 January 2022 (UTC) reply

  • Delete The two references to the term in the article are used in such a way to indicate that the authors recognized that the term was not a new term of scholarly discussion but instead a provocative label. The usages in the two articles cited in this discussion are similar in that there is no analysis, definition, or discussion of videocracy as a concept but instead the term is used solely in the title again as an attention-grabber. I cannot find any usages of videocracy that do not match this type of usage, which indicates that not even the authors that use it think it is a useful term that would justify an article here under our standards. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:00, 30 January 2022 (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.