Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tvepiso

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 01:48, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tvepiso[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)

This is a blatantly non-notable web-based TV series that is completely unsourced (previously only sourced with its own website). Per my WP:BEFORE there is a complete lack of independent reliable SIGCOV. I also considered numerous speedy deletion criterias, including A7. The only possible credible claim of significance is that there are 1,170,000 episodes. I do not think this is true, the website states that here that there are more than 900 pages. However, if you go to page 2 it does not work, instead, it displays the same thing as page 1. Given this, the fact that it's created by two high-school students, and the complete lack of English or Urdu coverage, I'm inclined to think that this fact is a hoax or false advertising and that the credible claim of significance is clearly false to an extent that A7 would apply. However, this might be controversial, so I'm taking to the AfD to decide. Additionally, this is moderately promotional but previously another editor, BoyTheKingCanDance, significantly trimmed the advertising, so this is probably bordering G11. Therefore, I'm taking this to AfD just in case. VickKiang (talk) 01:05, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Websites. VickKiang (talk) 01:05, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. For the reasons detailed in the nomination. I reduced the unsourced information and found, as the nominator did, that in fact there's nothing notable here at all. BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 04:11, 7 May 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.