Deletion of The Graysons (2nd nomination)

Comment: Fails  with its lack of significant coverage. Multiple sources doesn't mean significant coverage
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: or '''Merge & redirect''' This is an instance where a specialized notability guideline,  and the general notability guideline contradict each other.  There are enough sources apparently to satisfy the GNG, but NFF says that if principal photography hasn't commenced, we should not have a separate article - (this part seems to be more of a style guideline than a notability guideline). In any case, the existence of reliable sources demonstrate notability for the content, which appears to have been partially merged into Dick Grayson. This and GFDL rule out deletion rather than merge/redirection, as usual
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFF)

Comment: I am struggling with the idea that what is basically a rejected idea for a TV show could possibly have any |notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: To be clear, there are three sources for the articles. Two are Variety articles that are primarily on the Graysons. Both are significant-length articles. The third (footnote 2) is wrongly cited - it should point to the Mediaweek article that the fansite linked to itself references. That article, http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/content_display/news/national-broadcast/e3ideada6994c7b92e7a88b7bb04ad711a0, is 1/3 on The Graysons. By any remotely normal application of , this article meets the basic threshold of the GNG
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)