Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Working Women (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 no consensus‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 22:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Working Women (TV series)

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

This TV drama fails to meet WP:NTV as I couldn't find sig/ in-depth coverage. ROTM coverage like this and this and even [https://tribune.com.pk/story/2414433/i-cant-censor-myself-bee-guls-next-drama-with-yasra-rizvi-explores-womens-sexuality? INTERVIEWS] like is not enough to meet GNG.

Not every TV drama aired on TV channels inherently get a WP page. In Pakistan, we only have TV dramas, nothing else, so we don't need an article on each one of them based solely on some ROTM or paid/PR coverage — Saqib ( talk  I  contribs ) 17:25, 11 May 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: Relisting. A source review/analysis would be helpful. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib  ( talk  I  contribs ) 17:25, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  17:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: With quite a few WP:RS cited in the article. Also, the sources you mentioned in the nomination's rationale do help in meeting WP:GNG.  Coco bb8  (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 18:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Cocobb8, I should have made it clear that the majority of sources currently used in the article are not even RS, so they shouldn't even be considered here. And the ones I provided in my nomination aiove are not enough to meet GNG, which requires significant coverage. not merely ROTM coverage or interviews like I mentioned above. A Google search also doesn't yield anything solid in RS that could be considered significant coverage. Hope this clarifies. — Saqib  ( talk  I  contribs ) 18:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Sources like this and this do help in potentially establishing WP:GNG, but I'll leave it to other editors to see what they think as well.  Coco bb8  (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Neither of them is reliable enough to establish WP:GNG. --— Saqib ( talk  I  contribs ) 19:46, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep: I too do believe the Youlin review and the Daily Pakistan one cannot be dismissed. They're signed and the periodicals cannot be considered unreliable. The piece in Feminism in India has one paragraph:  The 2 paragraphs in Dawn, mentioned by Saqib, are not "routine" and I find the opening statement rather significant:  And the rest of the sources include mostly interviews but allow verification of the cast/date, production history and basic facts. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank)  20:14, 21 May 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.