Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baalveer 4

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 merge‎ to Baalveer as independent notability has not been substantiated Star Mississippi 02:01, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baalveer 4[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)

References are just interviews. No in-depth found. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep: The article's subject is notable. Someonewhoisusinginternet ^{(talk | contributions)} 14:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The series is notable, there is no point in deleting the article of a season when the series and rest of the seasons article exists and are notable. Imsaneikigai (talk) 20:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: it just started, there is some coverage, and it is the 4th instalment of a franchise. Redirect to the first season (or the 3d) if all in all this is not enough and if waiting for more is unbearable. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:11, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Baalveer is a hit notable series meant for kids since 2012 with 3 seasons already. Season 4 has just arrived. It deserves to be kept. Pri2000 (talk) 19:04, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Those who are placing !vote in favour of the article, I want to ask them about the notability of the season itself, not about the series. We don't need a separate Wikipedia page for each of the seasons where the primary page exists and no reviews for the seasons are found. Placing interviews and WP:IMDb links as references is just against WP:ICTFSOURCES. Demonstrate notability or please stop flooding. A MERGE would be better. --Twinkle1990 (talk) 07:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(note to Admin) - There is campaign going on per this diff, this diff, this diff regarding this AfD. Is this allowed? Isn't it WP:VOTESTACK? --Twinkle1990 (talk) 07:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:VOTESTACK Posting an appropriate notice on other users' talk pages to notify them about the deletion process is allowed (Posting an appropriate notice on users' talk pages in order to inform editors on all "sides" of a debate (e.g., everyone who participated in a previous deletion debate on a given subject) may be appropriate under certain circumstances). I notified them cause they also edit Indian tv show articles, I didn't tell to vote to keep the article so it's not violation of WP:VOTESTACK. M S Hassan (talk) 18:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@M S Hassan: how is "please help me save the article by voting" in this diff not a violation of WP:VOTESTACK? Daniel (talk) 23:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Just saying that the series is notable doesn’t make this season of the series notable. Maybe the series is notable, but establishing notability for a standalone article on Season 4 requires in-depth coverage from multiple independent reliable sources, which, in my opinion, is lacking. These sources are just interviews and announcements. The article currently fails to meet WP:GNG as no in-depth coverage of the subject is found. Do we need to create new pages for every season even when there are no significant sources? Additionally, another issue that the patrolling Admin should address is WP:VOTESTACK, which is the real reason behind these non-policy-based “Keep” votes. GrabUp - Talk 13:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - additionally, the page was created by Sockpuppet user Shabeelko. --Twinkle1990 (talk) 14:09, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I was not asked to come here and yet voted !Keep. So, Twinkle1990, and Grabup, may I ask you to please avoid or better, kindly amend sentences like please stop flooding, real reason behind these non-policy-based “Keep” votes apparently addressed to all Keep !voters. Thank you very much in advance. For the policy/reason backing my !vote, if unclear in my comment, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baalveer 3. I have no further comment. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mushy Yank, For confirming. I was not talking about you at all. GrabUp - Talk 13:12, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Same here like Balveer 3 nomination. The sources do not have the quality and depth of coverage needed to warrant a page on this show. Fails WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 13:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will also say that it is better to have some mention of each season on page Baalveer because of not sufficient coverage on all seasons. RangersRus (talk) 13:20, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note to Closer. Page was created by sockpuppet account User:Shabeelko and so is good for WP:G5 speedy deletion. RangersRus (talk) 13:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:G5 will not apply to this page now, as the article is substantially edited by others. GrabUp - Talk 13:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bummer. Unnoticed it. RangersRus (talk) 14:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Baalveer: while not a direct sequel, a section in the main article will not require independent notability. Most of the "Keep" comments here seem to talk about the notability of the Baalveer franchise, not that of Baalveer 4. Please note that Baalveer 3 is also on the chopping block, so merging with that would be a mistake. Owen× ☎ 10:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Baalveer, notability standard not met for this precise series based on sources available and presented, per OwenX this can be folded into main article using non-notability-contributing references. Daniel (talk) 23:36, 4 June 2024 (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.