Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/May I Come In Madam?


 * 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 delete. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 01:08, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

May I Come In Madam?

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Created by a CU confirmed sock for undeclared payments in violation of the terms of use. Excluded from Wikipedia by WP:NOTSPAM. Notability isn't even a consideration that needs to be taken into account. It has no right to be on Wikipedia. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:47, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Baby miss  fortune 15:32, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Baby miss  fortune 15:34, 17 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete -- G5/G11 eligible; promotional spam created by a confirmed sock farm. Such content is specifically excluded per WP:NOTSPAM. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:35, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep there have been over 100 edits to this page since the original page creator was blocked; I don't think this should be deleted solely for being fruit of the poisonous tree. I do see some coverage of this show; apart from the Hotstar site (which I believe is reliable for cast info and the like), a Google search gives  and . I believe that it meets the (generally low) guidelines for a TV show to meet WP:TVSHOW. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 06:10, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * There is significant off-wiki evidence in this case that would urge deletion in order to deal with the UPE problem. I'd typically agree with you on this, because the show in this case has been cancelled, but in this particular case there are very strong reasons to delete. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:10, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * If there are follow-up socks beyond the initial creator significant enough to justify G5, that's fine. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 01:44, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep notable television series. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:50, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: -- "Created by a CU confirmed sock" (per TonyBallioni) is all we need to know. Quis separabit?  17:53, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep: Sorry, but I'm with Power~enwiki: I'm failing to see the "very strong reasons" to delete other than that it was created by a sock, and I've never thought that being created by a sock is a valid deletion ground absent any others. We're talking a network show with hundreds of eps, and yes, notability should be taken into account.  Nha Trang  Allons! 22:40, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It was created in violation of the terms of use. The creator literally had no legal right to hit the save button. It's not just socking, and the additional reasons for deletion beyond that can't be linked to because of our privacy policy. Maintaining this article as an article is actively harmful to Wikipedia even more so than most paid editing articles, and notability should not even be considered because of that. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:42, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. No comment on notability, for me this is a simple cast of WP:TNT. The only thing worse than socks is paid socks. Ifnord (talk) 15:09, 24 December 2017 (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.