Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pradeep's Pelli Choopulu

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. Yunshui ^雲_水 11:08, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pradeep's Pelli Choopulu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No sources given for article, nothing to indicate this show is notable in any way. Ravensfire (talk) 13:56, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Ravensfire (talk) 13:57, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Ravensfire (talk) 13:57, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. No sources and no significance. wumbolo ^^^ 12:57, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I'm finding a few possible sources ([1] [2] [3]) but I'm still not entirely sold on the notability front. Even Pradeep Machiraju, the supposed celebrity host/bachelor of the show, only has three dubious looking sources on his own page. --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 07:18, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Star Maa. There are sources that have provided the coverage.[4][5] Sdmarathe (talk) 02:12, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom; I'm also not opposed to redirect Spiderone 13:49, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Though I do feel like this could pass a WP:BARE looking at the posted sources, still those include: what a XYZ person said on twitter, list of the cast and the only *reliable lookin* source comes from a site that does not even have a Wiki page, so even there the question how much is it reliable or notable? Overall, fails WP:GNG for lack of significant coverage from secondary reliable sources. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 22:12, 3 November 2018 (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.