Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Real Housewives of Washington, D.C.


 * 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. JForget 00:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

The Real Housewives of Washington, D.C.

 * – (View AfD) (View log)


 * I believe it technically qualifies for speedy deletion, but that would be extremely hard to argue. There is no actual content. The lead simply says "this TV show is expected to be scheduled sometime in 2010" without a source. The following few lines talk entirely about The Real Housewives of... franchise. The body talks exclusively about an incident which already has not one, not two, but three articles covering it. I would suggest merging this discussion with those three AfDs, for the sake of actually finding a solution, rather than simply having four collossal, seven day long discussions that achieve nothing. WFCforLife (talk) 00:55, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - Keep and remove section regarding the gatecrash incident. Gage (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep — I do believe that with some editing this article does in fact belong on wikipedia. It does contain proper citations. ContinueWithCaution (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It doesn't. Pop tower is not a reliable source. The Washington Post is the GOSSIP COLUMN, and even that contains the phrase "Why won't Bravo confirm what seems so obvious?" Source three is a FORUM POST. Given the sourcing record so far, I have no reason whatsoever to believe that source four is in any way related to this article. WFCforLife (talk) 09:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge with parent Real Housewives article until more information about the show itself rather than the Salahis crashing the White House state dinner surfaces. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 02:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge per the above user. This planned show has not notability, the only reason it's getting attention right now is because that couple that crashed the White House state dinner tried to get on the show (and failed).  TJ   Spyke   03:33, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Correct. We shouldn't be keeping an article if it's gonna stay in coat rack status for an unknown, infinite period of time. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 04:05, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Undoubtedly this article is coming; either wait for a little bit better sourcing or ignore it for a few days/weeks. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 03:33, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ignoring all rules means that we do whatever is best for the encyclopaedia in spite of the rules. Are you saying that reporting the incident in four articles is worth ignoring the rules? And if we strip out the incident (again), are you saying that a user benefits more from coming here than they would from going to a subsection of The Real Housewives of...? WFCforLife (talk) 09:21, 30 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - I'm not really sure how anyone could argue for anything but a keep vote. This doesn't violate WP:CRYSTAL because its already been well-established that the show is coming. Like it or not (I personally despise the "Real Housewives" shows), the notability is clear. A stub with only the lead of this article would technically satisfy notability standards, let alone the added layer of notability this article gains from the gatecrash incident. That being said, I authored much of the content about the gatecrash incident before I realized it had its own article. I'm going to shorten much of that content and include a link to the main article. Once that's done, however, there's no reason for deletion. —  Hunter  Kahn  ( c )  05:32, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You don't know how anyone could not want to keep it? How about the fact that there is nothing in the article about the SHOW. It's nothing but an article on those 2 morons who snuck into the White House. You take out the info not related to the show and you reduce the article to a 2 sentence stub.  TJ   Spyke   00:02, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep-The show will premiere in May 2010, Bravo has confirmed in multiple places that it's coming and most of the desire to delete this page is related to an emotional desire to sh!+ on the Salahis than any rational reason to delete this page.scooteristi (talk) 07:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply to bad faith comment Which part of "I would like to have a conversation in one place to actually find a solution to the current mess" amounts to an "emotional desire to shi!+ on the Salahis"? WFCforLife (talk) 09:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)fo
 * Comment- Wow ! This is the fourth article on the Salahis and their gatecrashing, which is now up for deletion, all at the same time !. This has got to be a new Wikipedia record ! Tovojolo (talk) 09:26, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed and improved sources scooteristi (talk) 21:15, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, but I recommend culling out all the Salahi stuff and shaving this down to a stub. It's not even certain whether Salahi will be on the show; even if she is, the gatecrash information should be reduced to a single sentence with a link to the gatecrash article. As it is, this article is a WP:COATRACK and that must change. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 16:03, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It's been confirmed that they will NOT be on the show. They auditioned for it but did not make it on.  TJ   Spyke   00:02, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep — This is a television show, and does not violate WP:CRYSTAL because the show is definitely coming. However, the gatecrash incident should be removed. Tpk5010 (talk) 17:18, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Take out the gatecrash and the article is reduced to 2 sentences. The only CONFIRMED info is that this show will exist, and that can be covered in the main "Real Housewives" article.  TJ   Spyke   00:02, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment — Per the discussion above, I have removed the gatecrash incident from the article, and have classified it as a stub. Tpk5010 (talk) 17:26, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * While I think the edit was made in good faith, I don't think this was an appropriate action, nor do I think the comment or two above indicated there was a full-blown consensus for such an action. I've restored it for now, but made a post in the article's talk page for any further discussion. —  Hunter  Kahn  ( c )  23:13, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:48, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per Scooteristi (again)--&#91;&#91;User: Duffy2032&#124;Duffy2032&#93;&#93; (talk) 02:20, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * His sole reason is "the show will exist", that is not enough to avoid deletion or merger.  TJ   Spyke   02:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as the show is still planned. --Vizcarra (talk) 08:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. If the show has been officially confirmed by reliable sources, as it appears to have been, and if the show will meet our notability criteria when it premieres, which it likely will, then there is no reason not to have an article at this time. Agree that the gatecrashing incident should probably go, since it is well covered elsewhere, but a link to the article is justifiable. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 19:35, 30 November 2009 (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.