Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mega Model Nepal

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. Regardless of tone, the lack of reliable sources is fatal. Systemic bias is always a danger we need to worry about, but the TV show doesn't appear to be especially noteworthy (nor, indeed, the network that broadcasts it) even in its broadcast country. Coren 23:18, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Mega Model Nepal

Delete per WP:NOT Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate list of information, and this article consists of nothing more than such a list, concerning a non-notable show Mayalld (talk) 06:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a nationally broadcast TV show, that I'm sure had as much of an impact in Nepal as the US version had in America, more systemic bias. RMHED (talk) 15:03, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Accusations of systematic bias are easy to fling (and seem to be used as a get-out-of-jail-free-card to keep articles like this that would be deleted without a second thought if they related to a UK or US show, but look at the facts;

No reliable sources.
Well over 90% of the article is no more that an indiscriminate collection of facts rather than any content that describes the show.
All GHITS are youtube, or blogs.
It is not broadcast on terrestrial TV, and there is zero evidence that this is a mass-viewing channel

Mayalld (talk) 15:16, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Tone of the article is not an encyclopedic one. Majorly it contains profile of not so notable people . Nothing proves that this show has mass viewing. Apart from this, this article says that the winner gets 75000 NRS. According to XE.Com, at the time of my editing, the value of that amount is 968 American dollars. This clearly suggests that this one stands no where if compared to US or UK version of the same. Hitro 14:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I wouldn't put too much weight on the prize money as the cost of living can be wildly different across various countries. In Shanghai, I was able to dine at a fine Japanese restaurant for two people paying the equivalent of $40 Canadian, and I know an equivalent meal in at a Canadian Japanese fine dining restaurant would have run me at least $160 for the same meal. The TV show does appear to be through broadcast through Image Channel. There is a severe lack of coverage about the show so I cannot support a keep, but do worry about systemic bias. -- Whpq (talk) 21:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree with you on money factor. The cost of living may vary around the globe. This article may survive this AfD only under the shield of Systemic Bias. Else it contains nothing which should be a part of an encyclopedia. Please note this article has Sourceless claims, irrelevant informations(like age, hometown, height etc. of the girls) and promotional ingredients(like cybersanar.com is best modelling agency in Nepal). According to the article, the presenter of the show is Vivek Singh, it redirects to some shooter of Indian origin. How could a shooter be a modelling show presenter. Hitro 05:36, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 22:08, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep--if a source or two are added as verification, and if that entire list is scrapped, then we have something keepable, so to speak. (That Singh-link, that's gotta be an error.) Drmies (talk) 22:38, 19 October 2008 (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.