- 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. WP:SOFTDELETEish given the low input despite two relists. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 05:58, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Filth City ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Delete. Poorly sourced article about a television film and web series, which was only in the post-production stage at the time of creation and still has not verifiably been scheduled by the host broadcaster or actually premiered on the web apart from one single advance preview episode on YouTube. This is based on just two pieces of reliable source coverage about it, of which one is local coverage of a scheduling incident in the city where the project was being filmed -- and all I can find on a Google News search is brief acknowledgements of its existence as a project in development, and nothing that indicates its actual debut is imminent. So there's no WP:GNG claim here yet either. In addition, this article was created by the film's own producers, in defiance of our conflict of interest rules. No prejudice against recreation if and when it gains coverage by actually airing, but projects that are still in the production pipeline aren't granted an automatic presumption of notability per WP:NMEDIA unless much more substantial sourcing can be shown than this. Bearcat ( talk) 18:31, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 07:38, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 04:28, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 12:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
- Delete -- no indications of notability or significance, and no RS can be found. K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:32, 4 October 2016 (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 delete. WP:SOFTDELETEish given the low input despite two relists. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 05:58, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Filth City ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Delete. Poorly sourced article about a television film and web series, which was only in the post-production stage at the time of creation and still has not verifiably been scheduled by the host broadcaster or actually premiered on the web apart from one single advance preview episode on YouTube. This is based on just two pieces of reliable source coverage about it, of which one is local coverage of a scheduling incident in the city where the project was being filmed -- and all I can find on a Google News search is brief acknowledgements of its existence as a project in development, and nothing that indicates its actual debut is imminent. So there's no WP:GNG claim here yet either. In addition, this article was created by the film's own producers, in defiance of our conflict of interest rules. No prejudice against recreation if and when it gains coverage by actually airing, but projects that are still in the production pipeline aren't granted an automatic presumption of notability per WP:NMEDIA unless much more substantial sourcing can be shown than this. Bearcat ( talk) 18:31, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 07:38, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 04:28, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 12:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
- Delete -- no indications of notability or significance, and no RS can be found. K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:32, 4 October 2016 (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.