Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derek & Simon


 * 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   keep. Withdrawn nom. Still not completely convinced, but nowhere near the utterly NN article it was when I nom'd it. Nice work by MQS. Black Kite 01:06, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Derek & Simon
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Doesn't appear to be notable. PROD removed without any good reason given. Black Kite 21:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete (See below) It doesn't look like the show has received much mainstream attention. The only gnews hits are somewhat trivial. The only notability guideline I could find supporting this article is: "The film features significant involvement (ie. one of the most important roles in the making of the film) by a notable person and is a major part of his/her career." - from WP:NF. Several problems though: the subject is not a film per se, and I wouldn't say this is significant part of any of the involved actors' careers. Jujutacular talkcontribs 23:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  -- Cyber cobra  (talk) 03:04, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. When first looking at the rather sparse article, I was going to suggest merging it to Bob Odenkirk, but after checking on sources, I feel it can be made to meet WP:GNG and should be expanded. If no one else does so, I will likely do some work on it myself shortly... after going through Futon Critic, USA Today, Rocky Mountain News, Fox News, Toronto Star, GQ, Toronto Star, San Francisco Chronicle, Youngstown Vindicator, Esquire, and whatever else I can find with associated searches. For a short series it seems to have generated enough press... and even an online video award TV Guide.   I think one is worth saving. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 07:43, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I presume you did notice that many of those sources were the same AP story reprinted numerous times? The problem I can see is - and I did look for sources myself - that practically all those stories are either about Odenkirk, Super Deluxe or web series in general, and just mention the series in passing. Incidentally, it didn't win the online award, it was only nominated for one. Black Kite 11:03, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * (To BK) Some perhaps, but certainly not all. In my comment above I granted that I still needed a closer look at the sources proffered from my quick search. And I do not intend to use sources that just parrot each other.  One difficulty is found in that Super Deluxe has been swallowed up by Adult Swim.  Another is that Odenkirk and the other folks invloved with the project are notable for other works, and that these other works are brought up in various press coverages.  It would be so much easier if journalists did not included project "A" or "B" for context when writing about "C".  I believe my first quick search only scratched the surface and that I need to seek further coverage for these other's contributions to the early Derek & Simon TV pilots in 2005, the Derek & Simon film festival submissions in 2006, and the Derek & Simon series itself.  So... I see that my own work on the article is barely begun and believe continued efforts will be rewarded.  If unsuccessful, I might still modify from a keep to suitable merge.  But it's too soon yet to wave a white flag. Best, MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 20:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * And yes, I just found that it did indeed win 'Best web video series' from Hollywood NetAwards... this page lists all their 2008 nominees with the winners set in bold: . I am still digging. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 00:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Additional input was requested to analyze this article based upon WP:WEB. First, here's a list of the current references for the article:, , , , , and . None of these deal exclusively with the subject. They range from completely to moderately trivial mentions of the subject. The final reference details a "Hollywood NetAward" that the subject won, along with ComedyCentral.com, Gamespot.com, Hulu.com, Pandora.com, Superdeluxe.com, TMZ.COM, and UniversalPictures.com. This may satisfy "The website or content has won a well-known and independent award from either a publication or organization". It all depends on what constitutes well-known. Personally I've never heard of the award, but I can't say I'm on expert on the subject. I'd certainly consent to keep if other more knowledgeable editors agreed that this criteria has been met. Jujutacular talkcontribs 02:55, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your welcome input. I had never heard of the award myself before searching... but I have to admit that there's lots of stuff I've never heard of... most of here on Wikipedia (chuckle). Heck... even the Oscars were new once. That organizations are recognizing the internet and looking toward evaluating web content bodes well for us all. In evaluating the award itself, research shows that the Hollywood NetAwards is a part of Hollywood Film Festival & Hollywood Awards .  I had never heard of them either, but it appears that they've been around for a while and have some credibility within the industry . So much more to do... I will continue working on the article as my schedule allows. Thank you much, MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 03:31, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Just found some interviews from May 2007... The A.V. Club and Blender (magazine), where the background and creation of Derek & Simon is discussed in a more-than-trivial manner. More to find... MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 04:47, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Given MichaelQSchmidt's great finds concerning this show, I'm switching to keep. Two non-trivial references of the show ( and ) from popular media sources, an award nomination and an award won . Together these satisfy notability guidelines. Good work Michael. Jujutacular talkcontribs 13:55, 1 September 2009 (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.