Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Love You Two

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. Sandstein 08:56, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Love You Two (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)

Upcoming TV series sourced to one incidental mention (albeit in two languages...). Can't find anything better, but I am unlikely to discover the Tagalog sources. If no better sources can be provided, this currently fails WP:NTV and WP:GNG, and should be redirected to GMA Network. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:23, 28 February 2019 (UTC) Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:23, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 22:25, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 22:25, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I would say do not redirect -- this is just a case of TOOSOON. After it's broadcast, it will likely neet GNG without any issues and there should be no prejudice for recreation. matt91486 (talk) 04:19, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Erm. We do NOT deal in presumed future notability; it's always about the demonstrable current state. If and when notability arises at some point, a redirect is exactly what you want to have in place to turn into an article. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 04:49, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I entirely understand your rationale for saying that, however, at the same time, I think red links are more likely to encourage article creation than redirects are. (No idea if there's actual data on it somewhere in the index of myriad conflicting policies). I think my comment was there to reflect the current state of the article (I did not say keep, notice.) However, if the show is indeed nationally broadcast as forecast, we can logically assume it will meet the GNG without any issues at that time -- hence my reference to WP:TOOSOON -- and at that point we would want an article. So my saying not redirect was simply my own view on what would make the creation of that article, when it will be notable, most likely. matt91486 (talk) 16:28, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete Our collective lack of Tagalog skills means that I'm not confident that my or the nom's internet searches for coverage of this series are proof that there is no existing coverage, but ultimately burden of proof falls to the editors who added the content, and the currently available sources do not demonstrate that notability guidelines have been met. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:26, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete on account of subject being too much in a hurry to break our ball. It's most probably all part of the 'pre-opening marketing-salvoes' and we're in the line of fire. Well, sorry but no. -The Gnome (talk) 12:57, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Too early and too many unreferenced edits.TheHotwiki (talk) 08:42, 7 March 2019 (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.