Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pukaar – Dil Se Dil Tak

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 redirect‎ to List of programs broadcast by Sony Entertainment Television#Current broadcasts. Despite the socking shenanigans, it looks like nobody here wants to keep this and there is no objection to the redirect as an ATD. Sandstein 16:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pukaar – Dil Se Dil Tak

[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)

I am neutral in this filing but feel a consensus is needed here than deleting the page and redirecting, given that this is an ongoing tv show which satisfies WP:TV. Also I don't find any issues with the current sources of this article, only thing is that more WP:RS sources should be added. Editingmylove (talk) 06:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - With only 28 edits you may not be familiar with WP:NEWSORGINDIA which is what all of these references fall under. Nothing reliable to show notability. I would also say that a redirect wouldn't be a suitable WP:ATD based on the objection to it. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:02, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. CNMall41 (talk) 07:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_Sony_Entertainment_Television#Current_broadcasts: Not opposed to keep, given existing coverage. A redirect is not only suitable but should always be considered when production, cast and broadcast are verifiable, which the said coverage clearly allows. If someone objected to the redirect, it is most likely because they wished a standalone page, not on principled opposition to keep history and allow further improvement or expansion here or on the target page. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: not enough WP:SIGCOV for WP:GNG and does not meet the WP:NFILM criteria. (Also fine with a redirect) — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 09:53, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Adding a few references. I don't know if that helps WP:SIGCOV for WP:GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovetvshows (talk • contribs) 11:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I was the one that created the plot tab for the show and added stuff to it. I usually just fix the plot or the cast section in TV shows so I am not completely aware of why the deletion might be happening. I would like an explanation and if there is anything I can do to stop the deletion? Whothatwhothatwhothstboi (talk) 16:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging the relevent people @CNMall41 @Mushy Yank @Alien333 @Ilovetvshows. I think this conversation should be in the talk page Editingmylove (talk) 17:09, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. @Whothatwhothatwhothstboi: you may vote if you think the page should be retained (see the template in the corner of the page: how to contribute and deletion process). Ilovetvshows may !vote too. Adding sources certainly can help unless other users consider them not reliable/not independent and maybe someone should explain why most sources have been said to fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA when it does not concern websites or media that are considered generally unreliable (and that are simply not mentioned there), as, not only for newcomers, that might not be completely clear. The quantity of coverage added certainly means something, though. Bylined sources would be better, I guess. Maybe such as https://www.news18.com/entertainment/abhishek-nigam-is-part-of-sayli-salunkhes-pukaar-dil-se-dil-tak-8884431.html, which contains a paragraph that might pass for independent coverage. But I will leave it that as I don't wish to comment any further on the topic and maybe my !vote is clear enough (not opposed to keep- suggesting redirect as a useful compromise, alternative to deletion). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:SIGCOV Imsaneikigai (talk) 17:09, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting this discussion as there is opposition to Deletion although editors have not offered bolded Keep votes as they should. To the nominator, don't bring an article to AFD unless you are seeking a Deletion. Because that is often the outcome here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liz, hello; you mean they have not offered bolded Keep, perhaps? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:20, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are correct, I have changed my relisting statement. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:40, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 14:33, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment nom and Ilovetvshows have been blocked as socks. Java Hurricane 15:59, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:25, 1 August 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.