Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NaagaKannike

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 Speedily moved to draft space for further development. Although there is not a clear consensus to delete, the article itself clearly does not meet the standards for inclusion in mainspace. I have therefore WP:BOLDly split the difference and moved this page to Draft:NaagaKannike, where it can be improved and submitted for restoration to mainspace in the future. bd2412 T 16:57, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NaagaKannike[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-noteable television show. Comatmebro (talk) 05:01, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:07, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:07, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 12:38, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - Update- Have added a reference (reference confirms that show exist passes WP:V and also that it's a "Hit show") and also did a minor mos edit. Cannot assure whether it is reliable source. But did my best to save an article from deletion. Left final action upon admins. Anoptimistix Let's Talk 12:54, 6 August 2017 (UTC) Additional comment - Though I am not author of this article, but did my best to save this from deletion. Anoptimistix Let's Talk 12:56, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The reference in the article (MediaInfoOnline) is basically just a TV-guide style listing. We need better than that to establish WP:N. My own searching also failed to turn up anything. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:21, 6 August 2017 (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.