Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tere Liye Bro


 * 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) 01:47, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Tere Liye Bro

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article creator is determined to have this article in mainspace, in spite of the existence of a draft here and an attempt to redirect. I'm guessing a PROD would be removed. However, it's entirely unsourced, and no reliable sources are on Google. I dream of horses (talk) (contribs) Remember to &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me after replying off my talk page 06:34, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (talk) (contribs) Remember to &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me after replying off my talk page 06:34, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (talk) (contribs) Remember to &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me after replying off my talk page 06:34, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete: Not notable, no sources at all.  N0nsensical.system (err0r?)(.log) 11:47, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 02:52, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Is The Indian Express not a reliable source? . Other seemingly useful links:, . matt91486 (talk) 23:53, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
 * ibtimes is a fake news website. iwmbuzz seems to fail as reliable source. Only one reliable source is not enough to establish notability. —usernamekiran (talk) 02:02, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia's own article on on the International Business Times does not seem to indicate it being a fake news website particularly clearly. It might not be a particularly *good* news outlet, but if I take the article at face value, there is little indication that it would be unreliable in providing coverage of a television program. matt91486 (talk) 05:28, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * apologies. I misread the title, confusing it with another similarly spelled title. Even still, only two reliable sources are not sufficient to establish notabilty. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:15, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * There is no set number of sources needed to establish notability. In this case, given WP:TVSERIES, I find it sufficient. matt91486 (talk) 04:34, 23 February 2020 (UTC)


 * delete per discussion above. WP:TVSERIES states Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a topic should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a topic should be included. Only because this TV series was nationally braodcast, doesnt make it automatically notable. Coverage in one reliable source is not significant coverage. We also have to consider current persistent attempts of production companies from India to create wikipedia articles of their TV shows, and actors; during the publicity/marketing campaigns. As per WP:COMMONSENSE, PR, paid news/reviews, WP:ROUTINE coverage is bound to take place. At least 2-3 reviews (not capsule reviews), and/or significant coverage is required for establishing notability. —usernamekiran (talk) 13:06, 23 February 2020 (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.