- 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 Draftify. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades of Godric On leave 10:23, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Bossing & Ai
- Bossing & Ai ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not satisfy television notability. Poorly sourced. No explanation of why this show that has not yet aired is notable. No independent sources. Robert McClenon ( talk) 03:47, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 05:04, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 05:04, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Probably delete due to lack of sources that are independent and not promotional. If not deleted, then history merge with Draft:Bossing & Ai. One is the copy-paste of the other. If deleted, be sure to delete both. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 05:10, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- User:Steve Quinn tried to draftify the article. Draftifying is sort of a compromise between deletion and retention. The author then restored the article in draft space, showing that the author did not want the compromise of having it in draft space. I am willing to leave the draft in draft space if the user plans to work on it, but for now, by rejecting draftification, the author has chosen to have a deletion discussion. As nominator, I !vote Delete. Robert McClenon ( talk) 05:35, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete promotional sources and trivial coverage do not meet notability criteria. not a platform for promotion. Also, probably too soon. Retain in the draft space until it can be approved for the mainspace is an acceptable option. If the outcome is other than delete then the history merge as described by Smokey Joe would seem to be necessary. --- Steve Quinn ( talk) 06:05, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Admin comment I've already merged the histories of the two pages, so if "draftify" is the final result then it all that is necessary is to move to draft. Primefac ( talk) 12:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Draftify. I agree that the article's creator hasn't demonstrated encyclopedic notability for this not-yet-aired program. But the program is scheduled to begin airing just a few days from now. It is possible that, if the show remains "on the air" for an entire season, it might well be possible to demonstrate notability at some later date. Moving to Draft space seems a reasonable accommodation for that possibility. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 12:16, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 Draftify. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades of Godric On leave 10:23, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Bossing & Ai
- Bossing & Ai ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not satisfy television notability. Poorly sourced. No explanation of why this show that has not yet aired is notable. No independent sources. Robert McClenon ( talk) 03:47, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 05:04, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 05:04, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Probably delete due to lack of sources that are independent and not promotional. If not deleted, then history merge with Draft:Bossing & Ai. One is the copy-paste of the other. If deleted, be sure to delete both. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 05:10, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- User:Steve Quinn tried to draftify the article. Draftifying is sort of a compromise between deletion and retention. The author then restored the article in draft space, showing that the author did not want the compromise of having it in draft space. I am willing to leave the draft in draft space if the user plans to work on it, but for now, by rejecting draftification, the author has chosen to have a deletion discussion. As nominator, I !vote Delete. Robert McClenon ( talk) 05:35, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete promotional sources and trivial coverage do not meet notability criteria. not a platform for promotion. Also, probably too soon. Retain in the draft space until it can be approved for the mainspace is an acceptable option. If the outcome is other than delete then the history merge as described by Smokey Joe would seem to be necessary. --- Steve Quinn ( talk) 06:05, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Admin comment I've already merged the histories of the two pages, so if "draftify" is the final result then it all that is necessary is to move to draft. Primefac ( talk) 12:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Draftify. I agree that the article's creator hasn't demonstrated encyclopedic notability for this not-yet-aired program. But the program is scheduled to begin airing just a few days from now. It is possible that, if the show remains "on the air" for an entire season, it might well be possible to demonstrate notability at some later date. Moving to Draft space seems a reasonable accommodation for that possibility. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 12:16, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- 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.