Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dudaktan Kalbe


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  HurricaneFan 25  00:58, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Dudaktan Kalbe

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unsourced, non-notable article about a Turkish television show. Fails WP:N. 11coolguy12 (talk) 06:19, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 14:26, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:07, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep, a long-running serial (two seasons, 75 episodes) aired on a national TV-station, successfully exported in Greece and Cyprus (ANT1, see here) Bulgary (see and ), Hungary, Croatia, Albania, Romania, United Arab Emirates, also released on DVD. Passes WP:TVSERIES.--Cavarrone (talk) 10:01, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Just because a TV show aired for two seasons and in other countries does not mean that it is notable. The more accurate test for notability would be the GNG; there are no independent published sources which demonstrate that the article meets this guideline. 11coolguy12 (talk) 00:05, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * GNG and SNG are both parts of WP:N and work in cooperation to determine the notability of a subject. Citing the guideline, about the SNG "Other methods of presuming notability for media related topics are listed below"; the guideline doesn't say "more accurate" or "less accurate", higher or lower. Rather, here (WP:TVSERIES-Why a separate guideline) explicitly explains that a subject could be notable passing its appropriate SnG despite a lack of reliable sources in the article. I'm sure you are in good faith and I appreciate your patrolling-work but you should begin to consider not only the GNG but also the appropriate SnG as a "part of the game" before nominating an article for deletion. Anyway.... I posted above some independent published sources (Turkish Greek News, Balkan Insight, Novinite - Sofia News Agency) which demonstrate that the series has received some attention from independent sources to support a claim of notability. --Cavarrone (talk) 20:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep passes WP:TVSERIES. Stuartyeates (talk) 00:53, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * See response above. 11coolguy12 (talk) 07:47, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment: I came here originally to vote due to a message on my talk page from 11coolguy12, . I'm a little concerned that user has since removed that comment from my talk page. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:45, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I removed it because you already posted on the discussion page. 11coolguy12 (talk) 04:19, 5 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep It does not matter one bit that the show is in Turkey, nor does it matter that the sources were not "in" the article, as long as diligent WP:BEFORE shows the topic itself being covered in-depth in multiple reliable sources... even if non-English sources. As the topic IS so covered, we have the topic meeting WP:N through WP:V, WP:GNG and the SNG WP:TVSERIES. To the nominator, and with respects, we judge topic notability on availablity of sources, and not upon whether or not sources are actually "in" an article covering the topic. Your concern is a matter for cleanup and improvement through regular editing, and does not mandate deletion. Just as User:Cavarrone has pointed out, the GNG is not the only consideration. While wonderfuly helpful, it is set to assist in determing notability when SIGCOV exists. The SNGs are set in place to assist in determing notability when SIGCOV is lacking. One does not over-rule the other, as they are both parts of WP:N and are intended to work in harmony... not dischord. Simply put, the topic passes applicable policy and guideline. And while Cavarrone posted a neutral request on my talk page, I reguarly patrol AFD as a matter of course as a coordinator of Project Film, and I would have arrived here and commented anyways. Had Cavarrone been incorrect in assessment, I would have just as readily opined differently.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:15, 7 November 2011 (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.