Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Harvest (audio drama)

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 Doctor Who: The Monthly Adventures. The history is there if independent coverage is eventually found for these to convert to merges Star Mississippi 14:30, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Harvest (audio drama)[edit]

[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)

Not independently notable, does not pass GNG. Best redirected to Doctor Who: The Monthly Adventures. I am also nominating the following related pages because they exhibit the same characteristics. They do not meet the GNG, and they ought to be redirected to the same target:

Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 11:04, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Radio. Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 09:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This should probably be added to the group under discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colditz (audio drama). ~Kvng (talk) 15:04, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Kvng I was planning to create another bundle of these articles here, but I ran out of time and it slipped my mind. In my opinion bundles are best kept at 10 articles or less to allow realistic scrutiny. Since no one has opined here yet, I'll add 9 more to this AFD shortly. Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 10:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No responses, please do not add more articles to this bundled nomination that will likely close as No consensus if this continues. I hope you notified each article creator of this AFD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:27, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/Delete all Lacks significant independent coverage. Reywas92^Talk 20:47, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Scherzo, which has independent notability as the direct inspiration for The Message (podcast) as documented in Slate here. [1] I’d also note that all of these will have at least one independent source in Doctor Who Magazine, which will have reviewed all of them, and which is published independently of the BBC. But with Scherzo I can confirm two are available. El Sandifer (talk) 05:18, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That Slate reference to Scherzo provided above is not significant coverage, it's a clear passing mention, stating that one element of Scherzo inspired one element of The Message. Also, the statement that Doctor Who magazine has reviewed them all feels a bit like WP:SOURCESEXIST. We need evidence of that- citations-, so we may check if the reviews were significant, reliable, independent, etc etc. Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 09:45, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It’s certainly enough of a reference to create a “cultural impact” section out of it, if only a sentence or two long. That’s hardly fleeting—it’s significant information about the story. As for DWM, I’m hardly speculating on the source existing. I guarantee you every one of these has a review. But to stick with Scherzo, looks like it got a review in issue 341, on top of a preview in 338, both of which will be a solid couple of paragraphs. And DWM, though it has a license from the BBC and scads of access to people on the show for interviews (not that there was a show to have access to at the time of these audios) is independent—it’s published by Panini, not the BBC, has its own editor, and is given leeway to publish negative reviews, which it often did. So I’m not speculating here—all of these have at least one viable source, Scherzo has two. El Sandifer (talk) 15:44, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks for the information about the magazine. It's a shame none of the Dr Who audiodrama articles I've seen seem to cite it, perhaps that can be done. I don't think the Slate source helps for AFD purposes for Scherzo. Sure you could create a one-line cultural impact section from it, but it doesn't contribute to Scherzo meeting the GNG. Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 19:11, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree that “is the direct inspiration for a clearly independently notable work” is a trivial mention. That’s clearly significant, to my mind. So I stand by my strong keep for Scherzo, and a more moderate keep for everything else given that it’s all sure to have one source—-I’d at least want to confirm that neither Dreamwatch nor SFX were regularly running reviews as well. Ooh, and the Celestial Toyroom would also be an obvious source to check. But with three separate magazines that are all reasonably likely to have been covering the Big Finish releases and one that definitely was I think the odds that these meet the GNG are strong. El Sandifer (talk) 23:19, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for giving your views. Let me know if you do find reviews in those other magazines. Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 08:41, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Will do, but none of those magazines have the sorts of thorough indexes that Doctor Who Magazine does, so it’s trickier. Glancing at a random 2015 issue of SFX I can find online, I see that they are running Big Finish reviews at that point, but I couldn’t tell you when they started doing that. Still, only increases the odds that all of these are sourceable. El Sandifer (talk) 20:10, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, right now we have no consensus. But if there are sources out there, it would help if at least a few could be located and brought into this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:50, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect unless reception (reviews) are found. GNG is an issue. The Slate article cited above makes a passing, one sentence mention of one of those dramas. That's not enough to keep that drama, but the source probably would be useful for improving the topic of Doctor Who: The Monthly Adventures which is pretty bad and has notability issues itself (WP:NOTCATALOGUE...). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:33, 17 December 2023 (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.