Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Namak Haram

Question to closer
@Rosguill Hello, Can I ask you why you didn't think a relist was useful nor a redirect to be considered? Most if not all of recently Afded Pakistani series with coverage and sources that some users thought not deserving a standalone page were redirected to either director/writer or network. What is the particularity of this one in that respect? Thank you in advance. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  17:03, 25 June 2024 (UTC)


 * The discussion was already extensive, and the consensus regarding sourcing appears quite clear to me--despite indicating additional coverage, keep !voters did not make any convincing arguments regarding source quality. Libraa2019's responses in particular, you judged and rejected all of them. DAWN, a respectable Pakistani newpaper also provide coverage of subject shows that they did not understand the objections to the source at hand (which concerned depth of coverage, not the fundamental reliability of DAWN itself, which Saqib acknowledged). Taking into further account that sockpuppetry was further identified in attempts to keep the article, I saw no compelling reason to continue the discussion. Participants did not show any indication of being swayed by your redirect proposal, which was particularly weak as you didn't even indicate where you thought it could redirect to, as a serial by a director lacking a Wikipedia article. signed,Rosguill talk 17:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Particularly weak? OK...I may have suggested a target in the old prod template or summary of my edit of the page, as I referred to my DeProdding in my particularly weak !vote. I cannot remember If I did indicate a target but I consider that there is a working consensus regarding this. Indeed, even if I haven't or hadn't mentioned a specific target, allow me to repeat my main concern: most if not all of the pages about TV series that were deemed non-notable per se have been recently redirected to the network when no page for the director/writer exists, as you may know or do know if you have participated in other Afds regarding the topic, which I honestly cannot remember. This should have been or should be taken into consideration in my view. Despite your kind explanation, I therefore still think a relist would be a very good idea and kindly ask you again to consider one. It would allow me to indicate that target, for instance, if really such is indeed one of your concerns as closer. Asking for a specific target of proposed redirects and other users what they think about that AFD is something re s (l)isting users, including extremely experienced ones and administrators, may do. Thank you. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  19:07, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You're welcome to create a new redirect to the network as a WP:BOLD edit, I don't see a need to reopen the discussion at this time. signed,Rosguill talk 19:19, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
 * OK. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  19:36, 25 June 2024 (UTC)