Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rapsittie Street Kids: Believe in Santa
- 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. Salvio Let's talk about it! 15:28, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Rapsittie Street Kids: Believe in Santa[edit]
- Rapsittie Street Kids: Believe in Santa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No reliable sources found. Only sources are a Wayback link, a 404, and a YouTube link. Special only aired once. No third party reviews found, only 128 unique Google hits and no relevant hits in Books. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:29, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:41, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:41, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. Not notable. SW3 5DL (talk) 03:02, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I can fix the 404'd link, but all of these are official sources linked to affilaites or Wolf Tracer themselves. Someone recently found a link to a cached version of Wolf Tracer's site, so if "No reliable sources" is the problem, it can easily be fixed. As for the low Google Hits, it's lost media. Not many people even know that this was a thing. However, many moderately popular YouTubers are giving it attention, so it's possible that it could see spikes in interest over the next few months. NeonToasterWiki (talk) 08:23, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
- "[O]fficial sources linked to affilaites [ sic ] or Wolf Tracer themselves" are not considered reliable by Wikipedia standards, because they are primary sources. "Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." YouTube videos are not reliable sources either; for more information about sources that are and aren't reliable, please see the previously linked page. Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 16:47, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
- The YouTube video is only linked to show that the special was uploaded to YouTube. Other than the plot summary and credits, I didn't use it for information. I did plan to use IMDb for information, but it did not list any useful information NeonToasterWiki (talk) 20:43, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
- Using the YouTube video as proof of the special having been uploaded to YouTube likely constitutes WP:OR. The blog "cited" is also not a WP:RS. The fact that IMDb "did not list any useful information" suggests that the special may not be notable. The plot summary has to have been covered in a WP:RS; watching the video yourself to write it is also WP:OR. Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 16:55, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
- I only cited with reference 1, 2, and 7. Everything else was added by a different user. I'm shying away from the page because it'll most likely be deleted no matter what I do at this point. It's lost media, what could you expect... NeonToasterWiki (talk) 09:52, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
- Using the YouTube video as proof of the special having been uploaded to YouTube likely constitutes WP:OR. The blog "cited" is also not a WP:RS. The fact that IMDb "did not list any useful information" suggests that the special may not be notable. The plot summary has to have been covered in a WP:RS; watching the video yourself to write it is also WP:OR. Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 16:55, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
- The YouTube video is only linked to show that the special was uploaded to YouTube. Other than the plot summary and credits, I didn't use it for information. I did plan to use IMDb for information, but it did not list any useful information NeonToasterWiki (talk) 20:43, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
- "[O]fficial sources linked to affilaites [ sic ] or Wolf Tracer themselves" are not considered reliable by Wikipedia standards, because they are primary sources. "Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." YouTube videos are not reliable sources either; for more information about sources that are and aren't reliable, please see the previously linked page. Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 16:47, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I can fix the 404'd link, but all of these are official sources linked to affilaites or Wolf Tracer themselves. Someone recently found a link to a cached version of Wolf Tracer's site, so if "No reliable sources" is the problem, it can easily be fixed. As for the low Google Hits, it's lost media. Not many people even know that this was a thing. However, many moderately popular YouTubers are giving it attention, so it's possible that it could see spikes in interest over the next few months. NeonToasterWiki (talk) 08:23, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: If not for the Wayback link I'd have thought this was a hoax, since there's no coverage of this prior to the last few years. Honestly, part of me is still a little skeptical. Other than that, it looks like this is likely non-notable, given that there doesn't seem to have been any coverage of this anywhere - not even in old newspapers. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:44, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 00:45, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 00:45, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- 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.