Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/House My Style


 * 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit  12:08, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

House My Style

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Semi-advertorialized article about a single-market local television show, not properly sourced as the subject of sufficient independent coverage to pass WP:TVSHOW. As always, every television show is not automatically entitled to keep a Wikipedia article in perpetuity just because it existed -- the notability test hinges on media coverage about the show, in sources other than itself, to establish that it has been externally validated as significant, but this is referenced principally to primary sources (YouTube videos, government reports, the self-published websites of organizations or companies directly affilated with the show, a how-to listicle on WikiHow) that are not support for notability at all. The only two sources that come from real WP:GNG-worthy media are from local newspapers in the same market where the show aired, both are deadlinks, and only one was actually recoverable from ProQuest — thus raising the question of whether the unrecoverable source was even real in the first place, because it also purportedly came from a newspaper whose content is archived in ProQuest, and thus should have turned up there too if it really existed — but even the recoverable source turned out to just be a very short blurb, absolutely no other coverage from other sources turned up in ProQuest at all, and there's no prospect of more coverage in the future as this is a six-year-old show that only ran for 13 weeks and has never produced any further seasons. Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt it from having to be referenced a hell of a lot better than this. Bearcat (talk) 22:56, 15 September 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 22:56, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete. There's a bit of coverage in the local press, but it all seems to be brief mentions, interviews with the producer, etc.—nothing that would qualify as significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Fails the GNG. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:27, 27 September 2022 (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.