Talk:The Rialto Report

This article was nominated for deletion on 24 June 2021. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This page was proposed for deletion by TipsyElephant (talk · contribs) on 23 June 2021 with the comment:
Does not meet WP:GNG. I searched on Google News and only found trivial mentions of the podcast.
It was contested by Drbogdan (talk · contribs) on 23 June 2021 with the comment:
Rv edit - seems the original article is sufficiently notable as presented - please discuss on the talk-page for WP:CONSENSUS if otherwise - per WP:BRD & related - thanks

Podcasting Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Podcasting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of notable podcasts and podcast-related information on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PodcastingWikipedia:WikiProject PodcastingTemplate:WikiProject Podcastingpodcasting articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pornography Low‑importance

	Erotica and pornography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Notability Discussion[edit]

Hello Drbogdan, would you mind providing WP:THREESOURCES that are WP:RELIABLE and WP:INDEPENDENT and which clearly demonstrate that the subject has WP:SIGCOV? From what I can tell the there is very little coverage of the subject, but you removed the proposed deletion tag with the edit summary "seems the original article is sufficiently notable as presented." Could you explain what you mean? As far as I can tell the article currently references its own website 106 times with the remaining three references linking to a blog, an audio clip that appears to include the hosts, and a dead link. I found an archive of the dead link and it appears to be a short article from an obscure website and an obscure author, which I'm not sure I would consider WP:RELIABLE. TipsyElephant (talk) 23:38, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Proposed deletion" is essentially a useless mechanism, as anyone can just strip it without ever explaining why. I have gone ahead and just nominated it for deletion. Zaathras (talk) 00:47, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TipsyElephant and Zaathras: (and others) - Thank you *very much* for your comments - and suggestions - as stated in my edit summary, the article seems sufficiently notable as presented - nonetheless - a casual Google News Search includes relevant news articles appearing in The New York Times (ref); Los Angeles Times (ref); PBS News (ref); CNN News (ref); The Guardian (ref); The Atlantic (ref); Vanity Fair (ref) - and more - further - a casual Google Search for "The Rialto Report" curently notes "29,000 results" (8pm/est/usa, 06/23/2021) - a substantial internet presence I would think - and includes major internet websites, such as the following: Apple PodCasts; Spotify; YouTube; WikiData - and a great number of other relevant results as well - adding greatly to the notability of "The Rialto Report" article I would think - there may be some room for improvement with the article of course - but seems sufficiently notable, in itself, for "KEEPING" the article - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Comments Welcome from other editors - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 01:06, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Drbogdan: simply searching The Rialto Report on Google will of course give you 29,000 hits. There are other things that contain the word Rialto. For instance, Rialto California which is the Rialto that is being discussed in the Atlantic article you mentioned above. Can you provide three in-depth sources that discuss the podcast? Trivial mentions in a few articles isn't enough to meet WP:GNG and I'd rather not do more digging through all your links that you clearly didn't even read before posting here. TipsyElephant (talk) 01:41, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TipsyElephant: (and others) - my Google Search was for the phrase "The Rialto Report" - in quotes - and not otherwise as you may be suggesting - yes - seems the The Atlantic reference could have been better (a "casual" search as noted was performed) - however - most other references noted above (esp NYT; LATimes; CNN; The Guardian; Vanity Fair and others may be better - and more than sufficient for "WP:Notability" I would think - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 02:09, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Drbogdan: there is nothing in depth about these sources. Most of these barely even mention the podcast. For instance, the Los Angeles Times, CNN and Vanity Fair only use the phrase "The Rialto Report" one time and dedicate less than a sentence to the subject. Similarly, the NYT artitcle only mentions "The Rialto Report" twice to provide context for a couple quotes without providing any usful information abou the podcast itself. The Guardian article is the only source so far that dedicates a few sentences to the subject of the podcast, but I wouldn't consider a short paragraph grounds for a stand alone article. As far as number of search results and whether or not it's on major podcasting platforms, neither of these determine notability. If all that was required was a few thousand hits on Google and the podcast had to be on Apple Podcasts and Spotify than nearly every podcast would be considered notable. TipsyElephant (talk) 10:20, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TipsyElephant: (and others) - according to the text in the main article, "The Rialto Report" article covers, not only PodCasts, but also other related materials as well, including "Investigative articles" and related materials ("audio, photo and documentary archives") - a worthy (and perhaps unique) collection of historical material - with or without PodCasts I would think - also in this regard, seems "JSTOR" and "Google Scholar" contain relevant results - please understand that I'm flexible re the article depending on WP:CONSENSUS with other editors - the article could use some improvements of course - but nonetheless the article seems worthy and notable imo at the moment - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 12:59, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]