Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Strategic Humour Initiative

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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) b uidhe 10:07, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Strategic Humour Initiative

[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 transnational one-off television special, not properly referenced as passing WP:TVSHOW. The footnotes here are one participant's own self-published filmography on her own website, the self-published website of its own production company and an IMDb profile of a different show only tangentially related to this one -- but the notability test for TV shows hinges not on verification of existence, but on verification that it got media attention from journalists, and there's none of that being shown here at all. Further, the article completely fails to mention a critically important detail that any article about a TV show always needs to mention: when did it air? Even with stars involved, the show still needs to have better sources than this before it can be considered notable enough for Wikipedia. Bearcat (talk) 18:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It wasn't hard to find news sources reporting on the special. I added info from two Associated Press articles (one for US and one for Canada), and from The Daily Telegraph in the UK, with airdates from all three countries. There's more information in those reports, for anyone who wants to follow those links and expand the article further. — Toughpigs (talk) 20:11, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:03, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:24, 16 June 2020 (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.