Intervision Song Contest 2008: Relies solely on one source , and some parts of the article are entirely unsourced and contravenes on original research guidance .  Article was previously PRODded and objected, however keeping as a redirect would not add value given a lack of article or redirect for other Intervision contests.  Sims2aholic8 ( talk ) 13:57, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I am also nominating the following related page because this article also fails WP:GNG , WP:SIGCOV , WP:ONESOURCE and WP:OR , as well as an additional issue with WP:SELFPUB : Intervision Song Contest 1977 ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music , Television ,  and Russia .  Sims2aholic8 ( talk ) 13:57, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  This was a Russian-language event, so the nominator should have searched for Russian-language sources.  There are a lot of references in the corresponding Russian article at ru:Интервидение-2008 Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 14:06, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The majority of references in the corresponding Russian-language article are not about the 2008 event specifically, but about the contest as a whole, the reasoning behind its revival and the future attempts at revival in 2014.  Like on the English article, the Russian article is largely unsourced for the actual contest itself, the participants, the results and prizes awarded.  Some of the information  within the Russian article could be added to either this article or its parent, however a stand-alone article on a contest where the results of the contest itself continue to rely on a single source does not appear tenable to me.  Sims2aholic8 ( talk ) 14:17, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I expect that newspapers in each participating country would have published articles the morning after the contest finals.  Those newspaper articles are unlikely to be online, though.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 15:15, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  The main Intervision Song Contest article appears notable in a historic sense, but the individual year pages appear to just consist of tables without much else to say ( WP:NOTSTATS ?).  Given the notability of the contest overall, any relevant information can easily be moved to the main article if it's not there already.  The one and only source (for 2008) is Eurovoix, which in turn got all of its information from the history section of the contest's own website.  As an another editor pointed out above, more care needs to be taken for foreign-language events, but even reading translated versions of the Russian Wikipedia, nearly everything notable would be fine as part of the main article.  Grk1011 ( talk ) 15:55, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , Kazakhstan , Kyrgyzstan , Tajikistan , Turkmenistan , Armenia , Azerbaijan , Belarus , Latvia , Moldova ,  and Ukraine .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:33, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:34, 5 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:35, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] A partial merge of verifiable information to Intervision Song Contest seems best.  But a blank and redirect is fine as well, as it still preserves history for future editors to revive the article if proper sources are found.  — siro χ o 00:12, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I ! voted delete above, but would also be fine with an 'official' determination of "redirect".  I find many times that drive-by editors just undo redirects without any improvement, so having this discussion to fall back on would be helpful.  This would also leave open the possibility for Russian-language refs to be found for expansion in the future if the event actually finds itself notable.  Grk1011 ( talk ) 13:54, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above.  Archives908 ( talk ) 18:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist as there are a number of different outcomes sought.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:14, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep , otherwise merge.  There are definitely some contemporary sources discussing the 2008 contest, which appear likely sufficient to meet the GNG (I am not familiar with NewsMuz but it seems to be cited quite a bit in article space).  And I'm not persuaded that this kind of Wikipedia coverage, which matches the format of many of our contest articles, raises any WP:NOT issues.  Regarding the second article, I don't find this kind of bundled nom helpful because a serious response befitting the seriousness of deletion requires two entirely separate inquiries.  But I will say that the likelihood of offline sources for the 1977 contest is sufficiently overwhelming that I feel comfortable including it in my weak keep ! vote.  -- Visviva ( talk ) 00:19, 21 July 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.

Discussion outcome: no consensus