Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Woh Aik Pal (2nd nomination)

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. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 22:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Woh Aik Pal

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While I found a lot of name-check coverage, I couldn't find any SIGCOV. Therefore, I'm taking this to AFD. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: https://www.gqindia.com/binge-watch/collection/7-best-pakistani-dramas-mx-player-offer-unique-entertainment-experience/ and similar coverage (this one bylined) ; coverage about production notable cast and crew mildly significant nomination= all in all, a certain notability; if other users judge this is not enough, redirect to the page about the writer, Samira Fazal, and merge (or with/to List of programs broadcast by Hum TV); opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- For the record, I’m also open to the idea of redirect/merging it. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Significant coverage in reliable news sources [1] [2] Received nomination at Lux Style Awards which is country's notable and significant annual award show. [3] Sometimes spell as Woh Ek Pal. Libraa2019 (talk) 15:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Libraa2019, This isn’t SIGCOV; it’s just routine coverage. Also, being nominated for the Lux Style Awards isn’t enough to establish WP:N. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first source is clearly under WP:NEWSORGINDIA and not reliable for notability. GQ is a good verification it exists, but not significant (it is included in a list of shows).--CNMall41 (talk) 00:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: As per nom. Should be deleted. Not encyclopedic material. Wikibear47 (talk) 06:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikibear47, ~~someone already filed SPI that you are supporting nominator in almost every AFD initiated by him, so you should present better reason instead of just voting delete to support a nominator.~~ Also, you need to see WP:ATA. Libraa2019 (talk) 04:51, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm sorry. My reasoning does need to be improved. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:59, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Libraa2019, I think you should stop your bullying tactics, as it seems like you’re overdoing it. It’s not a crime to share the same opinion nor do I see their vote as WP:ATA. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:23, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Saqib, No need of WP:bludgeon, i've just noticed you are canvassing others for supporting you in AFD's [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] therefore i am not fully wrong. Also WP:AGF. You have filed an SPI against me which is bullying actually. Libraa2019 (talk) 21:25, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Saqib and Libraa2019, both of you, focus on the article and its sources, not each other. Don't bring up SPIs in an attempt to sway editors in offering their assessments of this article. That could be seen as attempted intimidation which can result in a block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. A source review would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The sources on the page are unreliable. So are those listed above and in my search. Plenty of WP:NEWSORGINDIA and mentions in references about the actors, but nothing significant about the show itself. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An admin already notified here not to use WP:NEWSORGINDIA in Pakistan related AFD's and do not use it as a justification for deletion. Libraa2019 (talk) 05:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still hoping for a source analysis.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:35, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source analysis (as requested) - The first four are on the page, the rest were presented in the discussion above. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happymaza, Not sure what this source is and cannot locate anything on the Waybackmachine.
The International News, references says nothing about the series.
News18, typical churnalism as we see often. Falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA and cannot be used to establish notability.
Dawn, as with The International News source, says nothing about the series. In fact, the reference is used to support an award nomination and the reference doesn't even support that.
GQ India, probably the only source that comes close to significant coverage. It is one of of seven series listed in a listicle and has one paragraph (five sentences) with a brief overview.
The Tribune, also falls under NEWSORGINDIA. But, even if it was bylined, the source only contains one mention of the series where the writer was nominated for an award.

Keep - The serial aired back in 2017 and have still information available on websites as per above sources analysis (i.e, GQ India, Tribune and The News), I can't recall what exactly the policy said but there was something regarding serials that aired before 5 recent years should be considered notable on the basis of their available reference cites. Therefore, I feel rather than going for the quantity considering the coverage, it should be kept plus I found some sources on search as well like this.Reshmaaaa (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2024 (UTC) — Reshmaaaa (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

You can't recall what the policy yet only have 10 edits prior to this AfD discussion so you must have just saw it unless you have prior editing experience. By the way, the source you provided above falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA so cannot be used for notability. Nothing else you provided in your keep vote is policy-based. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do have minimal contribution cause I prefer going by the rules and policies and I'm taking my time to read policies and guidelines. Anyways, in Wikipedia:Notability (television) under WP:NTVNATL, it's clearly mentioned why this should be kept as it aired not only on National television plus it has garnered broader regional coverage. Neither it was instantly cancelled or aired on a minor secondary channel to be not notable. Since that's what policy said, so in line with it I have voted "Keep".Reshmaaaa (talk) 09:31, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First, you're referencing an essay and second, this essay states that television program is more likely to be notable if it airs on a network of television stations. However, I don't see it as notable because if it were, it would have easily met the GNG. PS. Declare your other sock accounts! — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

YES, It has been aired on Hum TV as well as Hum Sitaray so it is more likely to be notable as it has aired on a network of television stations plus it has been available for streaming in India as well, making it notable as per the said essay. As far as your claim of sock account is concerned, see User talk:Reshmaaaa. Reshmaaaa (talk) 18:43, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reshmaaaa, Just because it aired on some TV channels doesn't make it WP:N; it has to meet GNG, which nobody has been able to demonstrate yet. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:21, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The essay I mentioned itself establishes WP:N regarding WP: Notability (TV) and the article falls under this category I guess. I'll leave it to closing admin now to decide. I'll stick to my vote cause I see it as a notable show as per WP:Notability (TV) as I mentioned earlier. Reshmaaaa (talk) 18:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Liz already notified here not to use WP:NEWSORGINDIA in Pakistan related AFD's and do not use it as a justification for deletion therefore it is not a valid point to mention here. Libraa2019 (talk) 05:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not how that works. There has been disagreement about the application of NEWSORGINDIA but no consunsus if it applies to ONLY India or the subcontinent. You could always bring it up on the RSN but Wikipedia relies on consensus, not dictatorship. Those sources are being challenged as unreliable. It would be up to you to show how they are reliable. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:09, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But the case is similar here, your vote is based on WP:NEWSORGINDIA sites and Liz has clearly quoted here not to use it as a justification in future Afds. Reshmaaaa (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reshmaaaa, No offense to Liz, but I also believe WP:NEWSORGINDIA is relevant here and should apply to every Pakistan-related AFD. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of the comment left by Liz. I am also aware that some others have expressed their concern that it doesn't apply to media outlets outside of India. I am also aware that others have expressed that it DOES in fact apply to media outlets in the region. What you are inferring is that we should honor an admin's statement because they are an admin. I respect their opinion, but again, consensus is what governs. Also, you keep going back to this statement instead of showing how the disputed sources are in fact reliable which would be more helpful to the discussion. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:39, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 I'm not keep going back to that statement, I'm just linking your vote with a closing admin's decision. Based on it your vote becomes null and void since you've yourself said it in your source analysis that One of the sources covers WP:SIGCOV and others are WP: NEWSORGINDIA, which is not supposed to be a decisive factor in deleting this article. And are you sure this reference says nothing about article cause apparently it does mention the show in it's title and based solely on the show, Isn't it? Reshmaaaa (talk) 20:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You do keep going back to the statement by saying my !vote is null and void. I have stated (twice now) why the statement by an admin is not consensus. As far as the reference you provided above, it is NOT significant coverage. It is about one of the actors and mentions the show. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But in your source analysis you said the reference said nothing about the show now you're saying it isn't WP:SIGCOV. No offense but your analysis doesn't seems to be reliable to me. And reference just doesn't mention the show, it gives out detail as to main character along side other cast and characters. Reshmaaaa (talk) 05:53, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actualy, I said "series," not "show." And yes, I stand by that statement - "Nothing "about" the show" (quotation added to the "about) - It is about Feroze Khan and his role, not about the serial itself. This is becoming ad nauseam so I will ask one final time - are you able to demonstrate why the sources are reliable? --CNMall41 (talk) 06:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41, 1, 2, 3 are covering WP:SIGCOV, you've agreed with one of them being WP:SIGCOV as well. Secondly, it does meet WP: Notability (TV). You still think it is not notable as it meets WP:Independent, WP:Secondary, WP:Notability (TV) and WP:SIGCOV. Keeping in mind show aired sometime back, if it still meets these guidelines than it should stay. Leaving it to closing admin now, don't want to further stretch it anymore, Thanks.Reshmaaaa (talk) 14:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

┌──────────────────────────────┘
I endorse the source assessment done by CNMall41. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 13:13, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reshmaaa:, do not put words in my mouth. I said it was the closest to significant coverage. Significant coverage says "directly and in detail." In addition to the first source not being in detail, it is also not reliable under NEWSORGINDIA, at least for the purpose of establishing notability. The second we have already addressed as being the "closest to significant coverage" than anything else avaiable. The third is no where close to addressing it in detail. It is mentioned with the actor in a series they are in. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I concur with CNMall41's convincing source analysis. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:24, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The argument about WP:NEWSORGINDIA is a total red herring here. The sources in the above discussion that have been dismissed for this reason are very obviously not reliable, independent sources. Whether they're unreliable, non-independent sources from Pakistan or from India is immaterial; they're useless for showing a pass of WP:GNG. -- asilvering (talk) 16:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.