Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Littlest Pet Shop: A World of Our Own

Add links
Source: 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 Draftify. The drfitified version is at

Draft:Littlest Pet Shop: A World of Our Own. J04n(talk page) 18:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Littlest Pet Shop: A World of Our Own

Littlest Pet Shop: A World of Our Own (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG, hasn't been broadcast to gage notability. Cited sources are not independent of the subject. Atsme📞📧 00:51, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Hoping this spurs at least more independent sources, but in here we have plot, episodes and airdate. That's usually the bare minimum for a television series article, and this has what we need. Barring a sudden rebrand/meteoric intervention, this show will air.
    chatter) 01:34, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Are you saying that we bypass GNG and N and accept this stub simply because it exists? Perhaps I'm missing what makes it notable...please cite the policy that makes it eligible for inclusion.

Atsme📞📧 00:39, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment
chatter) 01:13, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
Comment - Not sure where having previously been "broadcast" is a prerequisite for notability. That is not mentioned in
WP:GNG. Leitmotiv (talk) 02:19, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
For television shows and the broadcast requirement, see
WP:TVSHOW. SportingFlyer (talk) 03:15, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
I read that......but absent significant evidence that the pilot has notability for reasons beyond simple confirmation of its existence, the announcement itself is not sufficient basis for a standalone article about the pilot. Did I miss something? Atsme📞📧 00:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure it's a pilot that's being aired? There are already two episodes listed, and articles say the series has been picked up. It's starting with two episodes back-to-back which isn't typical of a pilot. [1] In any case, there's no need to delete this, at best it's a draftify. SportingFlyer (talk) 01:35, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that the
Wikipedia:Television_episodes which states (my bold underline): While each episode on its own may not qualify for an article, it is quite likely that sources can be found to support a series or season page, where all the episodes in one season (or series) are presented on one page. (See examples listed below). Such pages must still be notable, and contain out-of-universe context, and not merely be a list of episode titles or cast and crew: Wikipedia is not a directory. This AfD nomination was proper considering the article comprises little more than a single episode and cast, and the sources are not independent of the series. It simply does not meet GNG per the guidelines. Atsme📞📧 11:26, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
From
WP:TVSHOW: in most cases, a television series is not eligible for an article until its scheduling as an ongoing series has been formally confirmed by a television network (for instance, it has been announced at a television network's upfront presentation as being scheduled and advanced to series) This isn't an episodes article, nor is it a pilot; it appears there are two episodes which are confirmed to air in six weeks. SportingFlyer talk 19:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
Well...the fact we don't even know what it is exactly is reason enough to delete or draftify. Hopefully the closer will be able to figure it out. Atsme📞📧 21:19, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
These are press releases or press release regurgitations, but I believe it clarifies the "keep" as a 52-episode animated television show. [2] [3] SportingFlyer talk 22:40, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but no. Too soon. Let it incubate. WP is not a platform to promotion a new "potential/proposed" series. There's nothing notable about it - it's just another proposed series. If you think there is more information you can add to establish N, please do, but as it sits right now, it fails N. Atsme📞📧 22:45, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree with you on this as it airs in six weeks but I don't really have anything further to add to this conversation. SportingFlyer talk 23:29, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 04:52, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 04:52, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If everyone who has posted here agrees, I will withdraw the AfD and draftify it. Atsme📞📧 01:39, 28 February 2018 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Littlest_Pet_Shop:_A_World_of_Our_Own&oldid=1210621123"