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. No sources were given, and no reasons were give as to why sources should exist. Therefore the fails GNG argument is far stronger. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:20, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hitlist UK[edit]

Hitlist UK (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a television chart show, not properly referenced as passing WP:TVSHOW. As always, television shows don't get an automatic notability freebie just because they exist(ed), and have to be the subject of WP:GNG-worthy coverage about them in sources independent of themselves to demonstrate that they are or were notable -- but the closest thing to a source here is a YouTube video clip of an episode of the show. There are absolutely no footnotes illustrating any third party coverage about the show, and the article has been flagged for that problem since 2008 without resolution.
As I don't have access to any database in which I could locate British media coverage from the 1990s, I'm willing to withdraw this if a UK editor can locate better sourcing to salvage it -- but we don't keep badly sourced articles just because it's possible that better sourcing might exist somewhere, we keep badly sourced articles only if somebody actually demonstrates that better sourcing definitely exists. Bearcat (talk) 14:55, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:55, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:55, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete Does not cite any sources, but can be easily to add some by researching. TzarN64 (talk) 15:33, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To allow more time to find potential sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 20:25, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP, there is no citation on the page, but there are enough sources (should be cited) found via Google search. Instead of deleting the article, it should be KEEP for improvement. -NeverTry4Me - TT page 06:52, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not enough to just say that there are other sources out there. Not everything one might find in a Google search is actually a reliable or notability-supporting source at all, so we don't keep unsourced articles just because somebody says sources exist — you have to show several specific examples of what you found, so that we can evaluate whether they're actually any good or not. Bearcat (talk) 19:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP Needs sources, but I'd give the creator/editors a heads up on needing sources and come back in a month.Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 09:51, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Looking at everything, I have to say this is a non-notable, automated and incomplete clone of official UK Singles Chart shows like UK Top 40 (TV series) or The Official Chart. Really no WP:N to be found outside of how they managed to wiggle around Official Charts Company copyrights for twenty years. Nate • (chatter) 17:43, 16 February 2022 (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.