Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuperCars Exposed


 * 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 List of programs broadcast by Speed. Viable AtD with no one contesting it. History is there when/if sourcing is identified. Star  Mississippi  15:27, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

SuperCars Exposed

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

WP:BEFORE turned up one press release, one less than sentence-long mention in an article on Speed Network, superficial name-drops in articles on Tanner Foust, and a crapton of TV guide listings with nothing better in sight. Deprodded without comment Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, due to the high volume of PRODs at this time, I am unable to document a rationale for some of my DEPRODs. WP:DEPROD does not require supplying a rationale. Please WP:AGF that I have one in each case. In this case a merge or redirect to Speed (TV network) is a potential WP:ATD. ~Kvng (talk) 00:17, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't want to do that, because literally EVERY SINGLE TIME I redirect, someone undoes it. Sometimes not even a full SECOND after I do it. What the hell gives? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:49, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't recall reverting any of your redirects so I don't know what gives. Who is doing these reverts? What reasons do they give? Redirects are useful to readers and often a good compromise for editors. ~Kvng (talk) 03:22, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Please supply evidence that "literally EVERY SINGLE TIME" redirects are undone. Without such evidence anyone reading this is likely to dismiss it as hyperbole. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:06, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Apparently some rule they made up that deprodded content cannot be redirected without discussion, and that doing so is "circumventing discussion'. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You are prepared to have a deletion discussion, so why are you not prepared to have a discussion about a redirect? Phil Bridger (talk) 10:06, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I've tried discussing redirects before. I wait for months and months and no one discusses it. Then after months, I'm like "okay, no one's contesting it so I'll go for it". Then BAM, two seconds later it's undone because I "didn't discuss it". Bitch, I tried for MONTHS and nobody said a word. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 17:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Once again, your "two seconds" looks very much like ridiculous hyperbole. We really can't get anywhere unless you provide evidence. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:46, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't be prodding anything to begin with if a redirect is an option. That's your problem.  Also many articles that were valid, you tried to eliminate with prod, then when that failed, tried to get rid of them with a redirect, then took them to AFD and they ended up as Keep.  Many have told you that you overuse prod too much, just too many places at once to go through. Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents is the place to discuss this though.   D r e a m Focus  15:24, 9 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Redirect as suggested by Cunard. - Coverage was not significant and so WP:N not met. Google provided sources like this, this, and this as examples. First is a forum, second is a TV guide, third is a link to watch the show. These allow for verifiability of the shows existence at best, they do not constitute significant coverage. Newspapers.com links nothing except to old-school in-paper TV guides listing the time it aired. The only proper news article that I could find mentioning the subject did so trivially here. I could not find anything on Wayback either. This failure to meet notability also presents another issue - being that the lack of sources means that the article as a stub has no reasonable prospect for expansion. There is little verifiable information to be found, and so in this case I think the fact it is unable to be improved to a full, finished, concise stub adds weight to an argument for deletion (however none of these considerations impact on a redirect to a list citing the show). MaxnaCarter (talk) 09:27, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * , would you support a redirect to List of programs broadcast by Speed (with the history preserved under the redirect)? Cunard (talk) 05:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll always support a redirect when they make sense, as is the case here. Thanks @Cunard - MaxnaCarter (talk) 05:38, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, ! Cunard (talk) 05:39, 6 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List of programs broadcast by Speed (with the history preserved under the redirect) per Deletion policy. Preserving the history will allow editors to do a selective merge to the target article and to undo the redirect if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. I did not find significant coverage in reliable sources about the show. Cunard (talk) 05:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect as Cunard said.  D r e a m Focus  16:13, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect As per Cunard. MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:30, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per Cunard.  starship .paint  (exalt) 07:25, 10 June 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.