Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sab Satrangi


 * 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 draftify. ✗ plicit  12:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Sab Satrangi

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

Non-notable just-started TV (presumed-to-be-)series in same form that was declined at draft by User:FormalDude: "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia." DMacks (talk) 04:32, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. DMacks (talk) 04:32, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:35, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify, it's way WP:TOOSOON. There's useful information in the current article, if the subject turns out to attract enough attention to be notable. Otherwise, if the subject doesn't get written-about in the next six months, the draft can be deleted thereafter. Elemimele (talk) 06:52, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify for now - Adding critical commentary would be extremely helpful, article creator needs to show more patience and work on existing drafts, not creating article after it was moved to draft space previously.  Ravensfire  (talk) 18:43, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify with no comment on notability. I know making no comment on notability at an AfD is like being a food critic who reviews exclusively architecture, but the creator of the article needs to listen to FormalDude's suggestions and actually implement them - best to stop beating the horse before it becomes a carcass. casualdejekyll  23:17, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify, There's no need to delete the article THIS soon. I agree that I made a mistake by submitting the draft for review too soon but still deleting the article may not be a wise decision. If the topic doesn't turn out to be attractive, it can always be deleted later but for now, the article should be kept. I will correct my mistakes and add reliable sources to the article.Tech2009Girl (talk), 8 February 2022 — Preceding undated comment added 02:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: I've indef CIR-blocked the article creator, who is also the only substantive contributor, for widespread problems (only one of which is re-creation of this arcticle against advice). DMacks (talk) 15:58, 8 February 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.