Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomar Khola Hawa

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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:57, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tomar Khola Hawa

[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)

Cable TV series doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG - coverage is largely WP:ROUTINE announcements of the upcoming series. MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:51, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. ––FormalDude (talk) 02:38, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Largely unsourced, run-off-the-mill series. Maybe even some COI. The Banner talk 10:44, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd, so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:56, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep-I have improved the page. For example, the popular news report: The Times of India, Indian TV. Where details about the series are given with evidence. which clearly passes WP:NTV with sufficient WP:GNG.Nilpriyo (talk) 11:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- That source was not part of the "improvement" and is not an in-depth reliable source. The same for the three other sources you have placed. The Banner talk 18:29, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I am commenting here by adding in-depth reliable source. You better talk with revisions. Nilpriyo (talk) 1:12, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Nilpriyo Could you please be more respectful to other editors, and follow WP:CIVIL? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 21:36, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be true: no offence taken, as I did not understood what he was saying. I think WP:CIR is also an issue here. The Banner talk 10:45, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

- MrsSnoozyTurtle Again, what are you seeing here as rudeness or disrespect? I edit Wikipedia politely WP:CIVIL. I respect all editors enough. Please come to my talk page for these discussions. Nilpriyo 9:59, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Nilpriyo, what do you mean by "again"?

Maybe I misinterpreted your tone, but your reply to The Banner of "You better talk with sources" seemed quite surly. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:59, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Delete per nom, article doesn't to meet GNG, refs are promotional in nature. // Timothy :: talk 18:38, 20 January 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.