Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The wives franchise


 * 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. J04n(talk page) 12:32, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

The wives franchise

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Completely original research. There is no such "Wives" Franchise. It's just a bunch of shows with similar subject matter. Article has been created and deleted prior. – Recollected &#8226;   21:00, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. No sources and per WP:NEO.  Per previous discussion could it be G4? (WP:CSD) meshach (talk) 21:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:12, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:12, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

A hard KEEP with maybe the stipulation that it be called something like "VH1"-wives franchise to distinguish from "Housewives" and/or other franchises? This is clearly a category and an article and there are many reliable sources available. TeeVeeed (talk) 02:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Per the similar nomination for the Style Network's so-called even more irrelevant The "Licious" Franchise, sounds like an editor with the wishful thinking that this is on par with the Real Housewives or Bad Girls Club, but really isn't (and also doesn't know what the punctuation keys on their keyboard do, it's a painful read); also seems to connect shows not based on cast or lineage, but solely on ethnicity of the cast members as being part of this 'franchise' (which The Gossip Game and Love & Hip Hop are not). No network publicity has ever mentioned the shows under this or any other title except as a VH1 original program. We don't create 'franchises' out of thin air; they must be fully sourced and fully connected by neutral sources, this is as far from a hard keep as possible.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 03:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Noting opposition to "franchise" I am changing that too. The current title is VH1 Wives Series. I disagree that the article is purposely racist, or leaning towards any particular race and it is for that reason that Mob Wives, and other besides, "sports"-wives are included.TeeVeeed (talk) 03:24, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Reverting that move as we're far from the seven days of discussion. Please do not do anything with the article until we have a consensus.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 03:33, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * What does the time period have to do with changing the title? Why is that reason to revert my edit?TeeVeeed (talk) 03:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Please read the guidelines of WP:AFD; no pagemoves are allowed to be made while the page is under discussion, because it can be confusing both to readers and the technical process of deletion. Because you moved that page without any discussion I now have to get an admin to move the page back to the original title.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 03:39, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * O-TY for explaining that. My bad, but I think I am going to have change my "Keep"-to Keep", but change title to delete franchise word.TeeVeeed (talk) 04:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm confused here. I do see at the bottom of WP:AFD where it says hidden categories, "Wikipedia move-protected pages", so then did it allow me to move it because I am logged-in? Just wondering why I was not prevented automatically from moving the page?TeeVeeed (talk) 04:08, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * OK-so I found the answer to my question. I boldly made those edits to preserve the article and clarify it. Besides anyone having to click through to one more page, how could a title-change really confuse people?(quote)"While there is no prohibition against moving an article while an AfD discussion is in progress, editors considering doing so should realize such a move can confuse the discussion greatly, can preempt a closing decision, and can make the discussion difficult to track."TeeVeeed (talk) 04:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Even if all of these series are notable, there is nothing to support the notability of grouping them together into this "franchise". 1292simon (talk) 13:45, 25 May 2013 (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.