Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exposed (Canadian TV program)

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 redirect‎ to List of programs broadcast by Much#Exposed. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:54, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Exposed (Canadian TV program) (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)

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG. Tagged for notability since 2018 DonaldD23 talk to me 13:50, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Television, and Canada. DonaldD23 talk to me 13:50, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. When this was first created in 2005, Wikipedia essentially conferred an automatic presumption of notability on any television series that was technically verifiable as existing, regardless of sourcing problems. That's long since been kiboshed, and replaced with having to get the series over WP:GNG on its sourceability — but there's no sourcing here, and nothing else of substance turned up on a WP:BEFORE search either. Bearcat (talk) 19:27, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List of programs broadcast by Much#Exposed (with the history preserved under the redirect) per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. The television show is very close to passing the general notability guideline. It received a substantial review in The Hamilton Spectator. The other sources I found were less significant coverage, which is why I am supporting a redirect instead of "keep". The show aired in 2004, so there is a good chance that there is offline print coverage of the show.

  A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article or to Much (TV channel). A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if additional significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future.

  Sources

  1. Hutton, Emily (2003-02-10). "Sum 41 gets Exposed next on MuchMusic". The Hamilton Spectator. Archived from the original on 2023-08-27. Retrieved 2023-08-27.

     The article notes: "MuchMusic is ready to be Exposed. The television show Exposed premièred last week and we got a chance to learn a little bit of what Avril Lavigne has gone through the past year or so. The show is a look at the world beyond the celebrities and the lives of the rich and the famous, when they actually open up to the camera and say what's on their mind. Other stars that will be Exposed will be Sum 41, Shaggy, Swollen Members and Nick Carter. They'll talk with MuchMusic and give viewers insight into their lives. Each week there will be a different celebrity. The format is similar to Egos & Icons, so I decided to watch it to see if I was right. It turns out I was. The only difference was that Exposed was more like "a day in the life" and Egos & Icons was a collection of clips."

  2. Less significant coverage:
     1. "K-Fed Gets A Text Message". CBS News. 2006-11-08. Archived from the original on 2023-08-27. Retrieved 2023-08-27.

        The caption notes: "Kevin Federline was at dinner while taping a scene from the MuchMusic reality show "Exposed" when he got several text messages. Jason Ford, a supervising producer for the network, told The Showbuzz that after receiving the messages Federline asked to stop taping and take a half-hour break."

     2. St. Germain, Pat (2006-11-25). "Extra". Winnipeg Sun. Archived from the original on 2023-08-27. Retrieved 2023-08-27 – via Newspapers.com.

        The article notes: "The morning after Britney dumped him, photos of a dejected K-Fed digesting the news at a dinner with MuchMusic staffers made the e-mail rounds. It's not pretty, but we're betting fans tune in the whole sordid scene on video as Fed-Ex clearly loses his appetite after getting a text message in the middle of his Much meal in Toronto. Jeer, cheer, indulge in good ol' schadenfreude with Exposed: Kevin Federline, on Ch. 46 at 8p.m."

     3. Alexander, Dave (2003-05-31). "MushMuzak: Enduring a 12-hour CanCon video-station marathon". Edmonton Journal. Archived from the original on 2023-08-27. Retrieved 2023-08-27 – via Newspapers.com.

        The article notes: "7:30 p.m., Exposed Namugeni's "hangin" with Michelle Branch while the singer cruises Hollywood in her SUV, talking on her cell and shopping. Oh-oh! It looks like Michelle got the wrong custom-made cowboy boots! Watching this is like being lobotomized W with a weed whacker."

  Cunard (talk) 01:56, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 16:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The show existed merely to provide 'guerilla PR' for record companies and it's doubtful anything about the interactions between host and artist outside what they said naturally wasn't filed down to the edges to be inoffensive as possible. It's a basic artist profile show, only with shaky cams and location shoots. This Nick Carter episode shows at the end that the record company provided the artist, and all of the sites visited were there in exchange for plugs. Nate • (chatter) 21:38, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Donaldd23 (talk · contribs), Bearcat (talk · contribs), and MrSchimpf (talk · contribs), would you be okay with a redirect to List of programs broadcast by Much#Exposed per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion? Cunard (talk) 00:47, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I would be okay with a redirect as detailed above. DonaldD23 talk to me 01:07, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  That would be perfectly fine. That's always a possible and acceptable AFD outcome, and doesn't really require my personal consent just because I technically said "delete" instead of "redirect" at the start of my own statement. Bearcat (talk) 11:14, 28 August 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.