Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Saturday

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. Sandstein 18:32, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Saturday

[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)

A supposed ten minute long TV show, whose article has no sourcing. I could not find a single reliable source even mentioning this one at all, let alone establishing notability. The most I was able to find was an entry on IMDB, which of course is not a valid reliable source. I initially WP:PRODed this, but the PROD was contested with the explanation that the article had already been deleted once via PROD, and then re-created. Rorshacma (talk) 15:40, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, your attempt at PRODing the article was not "contested". It was simply reverted because the article is ineligible for PRODing since it has already been the subject of a contested PROD in the past. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 07:13, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:55, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete Not a real TV show, doesn't even mention a network it supposedly airs on. Reywas92^Talk 18:18, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You don't mention which CSD criteria you think this falls under? If you meant WP:G3 {{Db-hoax}}, then clearly not: http://www.joesaturday.com, you can watch the pilot yourself. "Doesn't mention what network it airs on" is not a rationale for deletion (especially since it's an unaired pilot); I'd encourage you to revise your !vote with an explanation of why you feel this article subject meets deletion criteria. I'm not defending the article, I'm just trying to improve the quality of the AfD result for the benefit of the closer and future reviewers. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 07:13, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The article subject fails meet the English Wikipedia's threshold for inclusion, whether it is evaluated against the narrow guideline WP:NTV or the broader WP:GNG. The article features zero evidence of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources (WP:42). Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 07:13, 5 May 2019 (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.