Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Most Popular Girls in School


 * 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. KTC (talk) 00:05, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

The Most Popular Girls in School

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No notability established. Zero reliable sources. PRODed the article, but it was removed by the article's creator without addressing the issue. Nymf talk to me 19:20, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete This article appears to be non-notable in reliable sources for significant coverage requirements, just a normal web television series. According to an internet search, there are no reliable sources that are existent anywhere, so the entry does not appear to be suitable for an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TBrandley (talk • contribs)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 01:25, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

'The Most Popular Girls In School' series is a phenomenon- the tumblr blogasphere is absolutely full of it. This is enough recognition, in my opinion, to keep this page up. It's not doing any harm anyway. If it's a valid thing, why shouldn't it be on this 'encyclopedia'? The content is useful and correct.86.170.179.13 (talk) 12:46, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not finding any reliable sources that address the subject in depth. Does not meet WP:GNG. Gobōnobō  + c 01:04, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This is an ongoing and relatively new YouTube web series. It has not yet been covered in any major newspapers or online magazines, but the content is reliable and citations can be added just by the proof in the videos themselves. If this page gets deleted, then other web series like The Nekci Menij Show should have been deleted too. Instead of deleting it, why not help improve it? It even has it's own Wikia -- that can be used on background information. Hankie1016 (talk) 20:14, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Please note that just because another series, which does for a reason usually because it is notable, does not mean this should have one – see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Wikia is not a reliable source that can be used on Wikipedia, as it is user-generated. A number of reliable sources that go into the subject in depth are required for this to pass the notability scale. TBrandley (what's up) 22:58, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete No reliable sources. No likelihood of finding reliable sources. LK (talk)
 * 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.