SF X Fantasy Rayforce: Fails WP:GNG Ruud Buitelaar ( talk ) 03:46, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions .  Ruud Buitelaar ( talk ) 03:46, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and South Korea .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  05:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep .  Interesting niche stuff about Korean planned and apparently abandoned TV series.  Korean wiki article has no references at all.  Current sourcing:  1) English language email interview with the director at scifijapan.com [2] .  According to [3] , this is "a fan-made website", there is no information on who conducted the intereview  2) a Korean language news article [4] from thisisgame.com, by "Reporter Park Sang-beom".  According to NamuWiki [5] it is " a webzine frequently visited by people in the industry".  So the sources are borderline reliable, that provide some SIGCOV of this.  The nominator failed to do a WP:BEFORE ( WP:TROUT is awarded).   There is next to nothing else under English title.  Sadly, I am not fluent in Korean, so I rely on machine translation, but I see some coverage, ex.  [6] for example states "The demo video of the science fiction drama 'Space Electric Ray Force', scheduled to be broadcast in September 2010, is receiving great response from netizens", however the source is some minor Korean news site.  There is various other coverage: [7] - some of it may be rewritten press releases, Korean news websites are not great (although frankly coverage of such niche topics in English and other languages is often less than Pulitzer-winning too...).  Bottom line is that we need someone familiar with Korean Internet to comment on whether there is some reliable, SIGCOV coverage.  What I see is borderline, and given the nominator did not bother to analyze the sources or do BEFORE, and nobody else presented a critique of the article or sourcing - a week keep is justified.  PS.  I've added a bit about the cast, and refs to support the claims from ko wiki (which as I said has no refs); I hope my machine translation of the refs is not faulty.  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 02:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you for reviewing the references.  I suggest we stick to Wikipedia:TVSERIES .  I know, it is not a notability guideline but a tool to help determine notability.  It says: "In most cases, a television series or season is not eligible for an article until it has been confirmed by reliable sources to have started filming (excluding a pilot's filming)".  I checked the referenced interview; it was held at a time when filming had not started.  For want of confirmation in reliable, independent sources that filming indeed had started, I maintain my deletion proposal.  Ruud Buitelaar ( talk ) 03:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I concur that this did not get filmed, but the promo video attracted some attention.  I will stand by my weak keep, while hoping editors more fluent in Korean than me, and familiar with the reliability of Korean websites, will chime in.  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 01:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  The show never aired, this isn't a barrier to inclusion but neither the article nor the refs look like they're saying notable to me.  Desertarun ( talk ) 17:52, 26 April 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.

Discussion outcome: no consensus