Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heer (Geo TV serial)

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|Heer (Geo TV serial)}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Heer_(Geo_TV_serial) Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Heer (Geo TV serial)}})

My search for sources did not turn up SIGCOV bij independent RS. I originally PRODed the article, but {{u|Atlantic306}} objected. Atlantic argues that Pakistani sources about entertainment are likely available offline, but that said sources tend to not be kept online after a while. Noting that it is unclear why this would be true, that the serial is only 4 years old and that the type of media that report on such programming tends to at least have an online branch or even be completely online, I nominate the article for deletion. MrClog (talk) 01:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. MrClog (talk) 01:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. MrClog (talk) 01:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

• Weak keep its from previous experience of trying to find Pakistani tv sources online for nationally broadcast TV series that are most likely to be notable that I have come to that conclusion. The newspapers and magazines do not keep 4 year old entertainment reviews online unless they may be behind paywalls. That everything on Wikipedia must be sourced to the internet is a fallacy especially when the internet may come down in some countries in the current crisis. As this was a nationally broadcast series on a popular channel there should be sources available as per WP:TVSERIES offline if not online so it would be helpful if some Pakistani editors with access to offline sources could contribute to this discussion but then again in the state of lockdown access to those sources may not be available, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 01:13, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
• :I have done quite an extensive search for sources, but couldn't find any online. I am not convinced by the assertion that there WP:MUSTBESOURCES, per the explanation in my nominator's comment. --MrClog (talk) 16:03, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
• Delete - Two citations are plot summaries and the other one is an interview, which is a primary source. Analog Horror, (Speak) 03:17, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
• Keep I added 1 new reference, 3 more categories and also cleaned up the article as best as I could. Two sources are independent – The News International (newspaper) and HIP in Pakistan, a TV drama review of Heer (Geo TV serial). Ngrewal1 (talk) 20:55, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
• :The News International is a passing mention. The article talks about an actress and mentions a few recent roles of her, including one in Heer, but does nothing more than mentioning it once. HIP in Pakistan is in my opinion probably not a high quality source -- its [https://www.hipinpakistan.com/terms/ Terms and Conditions page] is literally empty for example, but it also allows outside contributors to submit articles (and we cannot see whether the author of the review is a staff member or a "contributor") Like Forbes Contributors, I don't think we can accept that as RS. It also has no public editorial policy. (But even if it is RS, it is only one source with SIGCOV.) --MrClog (talk) 21:22, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

::::{{noping|MrClog}} You may be taking it too seriously? Go easy please. Realistically speaking, these light entertainment TV shows, we all know, are not reviewed by sophisticated international business websites like Forbes. These small entertainment websites are never going to match Forbes in staff resources and quality of coverage. Like I said above, Sir, I only did the article the best I could. If it gets deleted, it does not matter much to me. Cheers Ngrewal1 (talk) 01:13, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

:::::Just a clarification: I didn't say Forbes should report on a show for it to be notable. I said that when a website accepts articles by outside contributors and doesn't tell us what articles were written by contributors or staff, they are not realiable, just like how articles written by Forbes Contributors are not reliable. And there are quality sources that report on entertainment. --MrClog (talk) 09:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

:::::: All understood. No problem. As an editor here, did the best I could with available sources. Ngrewal1 (talk) 16:14, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

• Delete. There are no sources cited that provide significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, and I haven't found any. Although Atlantic306 asserts that such WP:SOURCESEXIST, that is not enough -- there must be evidence that there was WP:SIGCOV. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 01:35, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

• Delete per Mdaniels5757's last comment. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 12:08, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.