Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chill Out Zone

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 12:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chill Out Zone[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)

Article about a television show, not properly sourced as passing WP:TVSHOW. As always, television shows don't get an automatic free notability pass just because they exist or existed -- the notability test is the reception of reliable source coverage about them in media other than their own self-published content about themselves, but this article is completely unreferenced, and all the way back to its initial creation in 2008 it has never had even one WP:GNG-worthy citation in it at all.
As I don't have access to any databases in which I could retrieve European media coverage from the 1990s or 2000s, I'm perfectly willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to that type of resource can find enough reliable source coverage to salvage the article -- but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt it from having to cite any proper third-party sourcing. Bearcat (talk) 21:56, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 21:56, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 21:56, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:59, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 5 April 2022 (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.