Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mi Raqsam


 * 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 redirect to Sabiha Sumar. I found the Delete arguments more persuasive and decided on a Redirect as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 02:09, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Mi Raqsam

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

Fails WP:GNG, a video (ref 1) and routine cast listing and two paragraph database like entry (ref 2) are insufficient to pass WP:GNG. WP:BEFORE found trivial mentions, 1, 2, 3, 4 failing the SIGCOV requirements.  VickKiang  (talk)  02:27, 31 October 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  02:49, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  VickKiang   (talk)  02:27, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 14:56, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep- The series is a popular TV show having adequate information and references to be published as an article. Subject is also available on IMDb, adding to the notability of the series. Lillyput4455 (talk), 21:18, 31 October 2022 (UTC).
 * Hey, sorry but per WP:IMDB IMDb is not a reliable source, and popularity isn't synonymous with notability. As the creator of the article, which two or three of the refs do you think are reliable, independent, secondary, and constitutes of significant coverage? Many thanks!  VickKiang  (talk)  20:25, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:56, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete or Redirect to Sabiha Sumar, since that's what most of the sourcing covers. Can't find enough in-depth coverage to show this passes GNG. Onel 5969  TT me 15:28, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep- Subject is a popular and notable series from 2012, and is still remembered for its strong story line and cast. Moreover, it incites adequate sources, therefore, should stay, If article sources won't be about its director, then what else can be the source? 9 November 2022, 8:52 (UTC).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.88.44.131 (talk)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete - The nominator's rationale is sound here, this does not pass GNG. Searching myself brings up no useable sources. — Sirdog (talk) 05:08, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep- Article is about a popular show aired back in 2012. Have enough sources to stay on the site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.182.42.100 (talk) 10:50, 20 November 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.