Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/50–50 (game show)


 * 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 redirect to Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?. None of the !votes argue for keeping this article, but there is no consensus on whether this should be merged into the Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? article. Whether or not such a merge is desirable can be discussed on the talk page of that article. I am therefore closing this as redirect, leaving the article history intact in case a merge is deemed desirable. Randykitty (talk) 15:53, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

50–50 (game show)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article on an obscure short-run Italian game show has been unsourced since 2014. I can find no mainline sourcing for it, and the Italian Wikipedia version only includes links to two Italian TV blogs. In short, I cannot establish the notability of this one under WP:GNG. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:01, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: It was suggested that this article be taken to AfD at the Naming conventions (television) Talk page. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:14, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:32, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 20:27, 30 July 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 09:19, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge to Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?: The information in this article is useful and relevant (both the format description and the version table). It should not be removed from Wikipedia just because it does not appear to meet the standalone WP:GNG criteria. Modernponderer (talk) 13:30, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Or WP:V... --Gonnym (talk) 10:51, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 * @User:Gonnym: What do you think of, , and ? Obviously not GNG-worthy, but do seem to cover WP:V. Modernponderer (talk) 12:51, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - This article claims to be a spin-off of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?, but Who Wants does not even mention it, so I can't support a merge of something that has no sources that claim this is indeed a spin-off show. If sources are found which aren't enough for GNG, but are good enough for inclusion in Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?, then it should be mentioned there, but not even close to the amount of information this article currently has, so in both cases, not a merge. --Gonnym (talk) 10:58, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 * So are you saying that, in case sources exist, Wikipedia editors should have to rewrite the content from scratch just because there is too much of it right now in your opinion? Modernponderer (talk) 12:54, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm saying that an article should be balanced and not have one spin-off have undue weight just because it can. At the very least, start with the information that is sourced (which in this current situation, the 3 sources you provided just talk about the premise of the show. The International versions table currently has no sources. I'm assuming that if you get sources for all those, then the GNG might be passed anyways, leading to this article having its own one). --Gonnym (talk) 13:37, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, and  round out the sources I could find at this point. But even at this stage I cannot support deletion, as there is already a significant chunk of content that is covered by these. Maybe someone else can help? Modernponderer (talk) 17:55, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?, where it should be mentioned as a spinoff. Anything more than a couple of sentences would probably be WP:UNDUE.  Based on the sources above, meets WP:V, but fails WP:N. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:55, 14 August 2018 (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.