Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brooklyn 11223


 * 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 speedy keep per WP:SNOW (non-admin closure) Andrew🐉(talk) 22:21, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Brooklyn 11223

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

In the Wikipedia scope, there is nothing particularly notable about this show. Trillfendi (talk) 18:58, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:17, 10 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep as meets WP:NTV and GNG, Clearly BEFORE wasn't done. Admittedly this was a very shortlived show with only having one series in 2012 and that was it however there's certainly notability here:
 * https://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv-movies/brooklyn-11223-takes-reality-tv-world-tough-talking-women-feud-article-1.1038404 (- Unavailable in the UK due to GDPR)
 * https://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv-movies/oxygen-brooklyn-11223-style-worth-watching-article-1.1049299 (- Unavailable in the UK due to GDPR)

– Davey 2010 Talk 21:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Two links that you can't even access that say "PAID POST" on behalf of the advertiser, a review, an unreliable gossip source, and a puff piece that didn't age well make this a speedy keep to you? Trillfendi (talk) 21:11, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Well I cannot access those so I have no idea what those 2 consist of so won't comment on them, IMHO the WNYC source isn't great however it isn't bad either, Either way the rest are absolutely fine. – Davey 2010 Talk
 * Buzzfeed literally just took a press release from straight from Oxygen and put it in a quote box as used that as their "article". Imagine thinking that is absolutely fine. Trillfendi (talk) 23:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh well, Still coverage at the end of the day, I would suggest you withdraw this. – Davey 2010 Talk 23:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * And I suggest you start analyzing. Trillfendi (talk) 23:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * >Implying I didn't, Programme is notable and I've proven that, Again I would suggest you withdraw this. – Davey 2010 Talk 23:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:NTV, which says, "Generally, an individual radio or television program is likely to be notable if it airs on a network of radio or television stations (either national or regional in scope), or on a cable television channel with a broad regional or national audience." The New York Times review and WNYC article provided by Davey2010 support the claim for notability. — Toughpigs (talk) 21:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:11, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:12, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:12, 10 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand. The WNYC article can be used to source a "Critical response" section. pburka (talk) 23:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - per the sources found by . Koridas (...Puerto Rico for statehood!) 04:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - Since my !vote above, I've added and sourced the majority of the cast table and their hometown areas, I've sourced episode titles, I've resourced premiere date and I've added episode summaries (Pre-AFD, Post AFD), This all could've been done by Trillfendi herself but hey ho another article saved. :), Thanks, – Davey 2010 Talk 12:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Why would I “save” a futile article that still looks like shit? TV.com is not even a reliable source. Even a child knows that. Half the cast’s “hometowns” remain empty. And learn how to use the diff template. Trillfendi (talk) 12:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you is the term you're looking for- It's a source - It states the information required, Learn how to source articles and learn BEFORE!. – Davey 2010 Talk 13:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * An article you would not have even come across let alone give a “flying toss” about had you not been stalking my contributions like you always do. My “Before” didn’t show anything worth saving for a network that completely abandoned the format. Nothing was notable about the show for a Wikipedia article. You think any mention of something is worth inclusion even when it’s literally pulled from the promotional press release as if there are no policies? That’s asinine. Trillfendi (talk) 13:29, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I watchlisted the article back in 2013-2014 to source it but until now had completely forgot to check back on it. Well the programme is clearly notable and I've proved that. Again I don't care what you think, I care our readers and what they think. The programme is notable and I've proven that. – Davey 2010 Talk 13:37, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per Davey. -Roxy the effin dog . wooF 14:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per Toughpigs.-- P-K3 (talk) 15:08, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per . serial   # 19:25, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hang on ..... -Roxy the effin dog . wooF 19:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per me, myself, and I. Drmies (talk) 22:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per Drmies. L EPRICAVARK ( talk ) 22:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per the New York Times. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  17:12, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per all the above. I think we passed the point some time ago where we need to keep this open. Anyone for a SNOW close? - SchroCat (talk) 17:16, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I was going to do it myself, but I preferred to vote per those that hadn't voted..., could you do the honors packing away this WP:SNOW :)   serial   # 17:20, 12 May 2020 (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.