Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Very Important People (2023 TV series)


 * 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 Draftify‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ per reasonable requests Star   Mississippi  00:51, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Very Important People (2023 TV series)

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

Can't find it passes WP:GNG. Literary no review at all. Twinkle1990 (talk) 14:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Internet,  and United States of America. Twinkle1990 (talk) 14:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak keep: Sourcing from the CBC is an interview with the host, but talks about the show. The Variety article shows this is up for an Emmy award and briefly talks about the show, also showing notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:28, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Week Keep? So you aren't sure for Keep? All interview is primary, not mounting to WP:SIGCOV as well as WP:GNG. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:31, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Interviee is with the person, but it supports an article about the tv show. The Emmy nomination makes it notable rrgardless.Oaktree b (talk) 19:11, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Slight correction: The show has only been submitted for Emmy consideration; the official nominations won't be out until next week. That's why I didn't mention it anywhere in the article yet. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 20:01, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * We can wait until next week I suppose to see if it makes the final list for the award. Oaktree b (talk) 20:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: Article creator here. Honestly didn't expect it to get to get promoted out of the draft space; I wasn't sure if it had enough, so I submitted it to get insight on areas for improvement, maybe see if coverage increases substantially should that Emmy nod go through. I'm not going to weigh in on whether the article should be kept since I'm obviously a little biased (though I will say starting a delete discussion minutes after someone accepts the draft doesn't seem kosher), but if it does get the axe, I'd prefer it get moved back to the draft space so I can continue source-hunting and working on improving it. Thanks much. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 16:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: Coverage cited shows it meets the requirement for GNG. I cannot understand the nomination. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  22:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Which coverage? Please enlighten with STA. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't know what STA is. Examples of significant coverage and significant mentions, see page for sources of some.
 * (Deadline)
 * (Variety)
 * (CBC)
 * (Afterbuzz)
 * (134th St)
 * (ScreenHub AU)
 * ScreenRant
 * And I will leave it at that. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  14:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify: The show doesn't currently (article or elsewhere) have significant reliable independent coverage sufficient to meet GNG:
 * The CBC interview would be non-independent by default but some of it has additional significant independent qualitative coverage. (✅)
 * The Variety article only has passing coverage
 * The Deadline interview is non-independent
 * The Observer is a student newspaper and I believe while independent/reliable should have low weight (xref WP:UNIGUIDE)
 * The Polygon article is non-independent
 * The Webby's award is a public web-vote and not the expert-voted Webby award, and is thus insufficient/unreliable for consideration of acclaim/impact. Even if it were the expert-voted Webby award I think it would be low weight given how many Webby awards there are (see the popup menus from the category sidebar at https://winners.webbyawards.com/winners)
 * That said, I think it has a reasonable chance of an Emmy nomination given that its category is such an oddball one and there will be 5 nominees from only 22 on the longlist even before considerations of the 24000 eligible voter pool potentially skewing slightly in favour of Dropout, and Dropout fans really liking Dropout shows. If it is, then between the nomination and the second season and the awards We may sometime actually get sufficient independent qualitative coverage, but unfortunately it's not there yet for me.
 * (BTW, for anyone unfamiliar with the show, youtube has the first episode - enjoy)
 * ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 04:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Update on this: The list for this year's awards has come out, and no Dropout productions were nominated. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 16:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Update on this: The list for this year's awards has come out, and no Dropout productions were nominated. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 16:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

criterion]] but some are commenting that the CBC interview alone passes the criterion. Is it a rationale AfD discussion? If so, then we have to accept many AfC drafts with single coverage. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:12, 10 July 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep The CBC article alone makes this pass GNG. Hameltion (talk &#124; contribs) 06:15, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment - entire AfD discussion seems to be in wrongway. The nomination was placed per lack of notability per [[WP:THREE|minimal
 * If nothing else, redirect to as an ATD. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 20:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment - For Indian TV Series, we don't accept any draft not meeting WP:THREE concluding WP:SIGCOV. Then why this one should be exempted? I wished for a fair debate which is not yet demonstrated. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify per Hydronium Hydroxide's source analysis and the creator's request. I don't see sufficient significant coverage but it's reasonable to expect more. Contrary to one of the "keep" !votes the show has not been Emmy-nominated, just submitted for consideration, so it doesn't pass on those grounds. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:52, 21 July 2024 (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.