Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Retroscripting

Retroscripting

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

The subject does not meet WP:GNG. Judging by a Google News archive search, the term has only been used by the creators of Home Movies in reference to that show. None of the sources cited in the article prior to 9 November use any form of the word except for one, and that one links the word back to our article, which at the time was a completely unsourced stub. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 04:11, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note - completing this nomination for an IP-user, as requested at WT:AfD, no opinion on the topic myself. GermanJoe (talk) 12:27, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I’ve dramatically edited the article since requesting the AFD nom. Here is the version before my edits: [1]. It was full of unsupported claims and unrelated sources, so I basically started over. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 15:38, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:41, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to Home Movies. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:12, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Support as nom, but correct to Home Movies (TV series). I don’t think there’s anything to merge, though; the target article already describes this subject. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 02:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - On second thought, I recommend delete without redirect. I don’t see any reason for the redirect (I don’t believe anyone would look up a TV show via an obscure term internally used to describe its development); and the article has no unique content, and was previously full of unverified claims and original research, so there’s nothing to merge. @Shawn in Montreal: Am I wrong? —67.14.236.50 (talk) 05:13, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:14, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:44, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]