Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rumours (TV series)


 * 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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Rumours (TV series)

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

Not easy to search but I didn't see any coverage of the show, and this article is completely unsourced. Seeing as it only lasted one season and was cancelled after less than half of its run, I doubt it's that well-remembered or covered. QuietHere (talk) 04:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Canada. QuietHere (talk) 04:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. The question is in where you search; for a show that aired almost 20 years ago, Google ain't gonna cut it. Simple archive search got me up to five citations, which is more than enough. (Also, spoiler alert: no show that airs on the CBC is ever going to go entirely uncovered at all — shows that do well are going to get coverage because they're popular, shows that don't do well are going to get coverage because that provides an opportunity for commercial media to take potshots at the CBC for airing a show that didn't do well, and the end result is that no CBC show ever goes entirely without coverage. The key, again, is knowing where to find it.) Bearcat (talk) 05:52, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Agreed, this relates to WP:NTEMP too. Belichickoverbrady (talk) 18:15, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That is a perfectly fair call. As a non-Canadian, I would not know these things nor where to look for this type of coverage, especially given it appears none of the articles you added are available online. Assuming that you haven't completely made these articles up then it appears the coverage is good after all. I'm not going to withdraw this just yet simply because I can't verify these articles' existence myself, but I'll put my trust in the process. QuietHere (talk) 18:23, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia does not have a rule that our sources all have to be Googleable web pages, or that print-only sourcing retrieved from books or newspaper archiving databases is inadmissible. A lot of legitimate article topics would have to be deleted if that were the case, because a lot of things had their peak prominence before there was a web. Bearcat (talk) 19:05, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I didn't say anything opposed to that. I simply said that I can't personally vet these sources because I don't have access to a Canadian newspaper archive which would contain the material. That doesn't mean the sources are bad, just that I can't confirm anything about them with my own eyes and thus wouldn't feel comfortable withdrawing based on what is essentially a blind trust. QuietHere (talk) 20:29, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There's more than enough coverage in Proquest that is accessible through Wikipedia Library sources to make it clear that this is notable! If you don't have the tools to assess Canadian articles, then you'd be best to stay away from them! And how even if you thought this should be deleted, CBC (SRC) also did the earlier French version which won 6 Geminis! Perhaps this page should expand coverage of that version, but 6 Geminis and an AFD! Can you, User:QuietHere, please withdraw this! Nfitz (talk) 00:18, 23 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep - a completely flawed BEFORE by User:QuietHere. Why have they not yet withdrawn this horrific nomination! The BEFORE was bad enough - but to actually think there's any possibility that a sitcom with 20-episodes on the national broadcaster wouldn't be notable, suggests that the editor shouldn't be working in this area. Without even looking beyond Proquest (surely there's also significant coverage in newspapers.com) some excellent detailed in-depth articles on the English version are Toronto Star November 2006, Montreal Gazette March 2006, Winnipeg Free Press October 2006, Globe and Mail June 2006, National Post October 2006 and Canadian Business . Nfitz (talk) 00:18, 23 January 2023 (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.