The result was delete. No sources were given, and no reasons were give as to why sources should exist. Therefore the fails GNG argument is far stronger. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:20, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Article about a television chart show, not
properly referenced as passing
WP:TVSHOW. As always, television shows don't get an automatic notability freebie just because they exist(ed), and have to be the subject of
WP:GNG-worthy coverage about them in sources independent of themselves to demonstrate that they are or were notable -- but the closest thing to a source here is a YouTube video clip of an episode of the show. There are absolutely no footnotes illustrating any third party coverage about the show, and the article has been flagged for that problem since 2008 without resolution.
As I don't have access to any database in which I could locate British media coverage from the 1990s, I'm willing to withdraw this if a UK editor can locate better sourcing to salvage it -- but we don't keep badly sourced articles just because it's possible that better sourcing might exist somewhere, we keep badly sourced articles only if somebody actually demonstrates that better sourcing definitely exists.
Bearcat (
talk) 14:55, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To allow more time to find potential sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Coffee //
have a ☕️ //
beans // 20:25, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. No sources were given, and no reasons were give as to why sources should exist. Therefore the fails GNG argument is far stronger. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:20, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Article about a television chart show, not
properly referenced as passing
WP:TVSHOW. As always, television shows don't get an automatic notability freebie just because they exist(ed), and have to be the subject of
WP:GNG-worthy coverage about them in sources independent of themselves to demonstrate that they are or were notable -- but the closest thing to a source here is a YouTube video clip of an episode of the show. There are absolutely no footnotes illustrating any third party coverage about the show, and the article has been flagged for that problem since 2008 without resolution.
As I don't have access to any database in which I could locate British media coverage from the 1990s, I'm willing to withdraw this if a UK editor can locate better sourcing to salvage it -- but we don't keep badly sourced articles just because it's possible that better sourcing might exist somewhere, we keep badly sourced articles only if somebody actually demonstrates that better sourcing definitely exists.
Bearcat (
talk) 14:55, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To allow more time to find potential sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Coffee //
have a ☕️ //
beans // 20:25, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)