Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hamish and Andy's Euro Gap Year

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 Hamish & Andy. This is a bit of a supervote, but I think that Bazonka's suggestion will best effectuate the consensus here, which is to remove the article now, but make it easy to bring back. A redirect is superior for this because it can be undone by anyone without having to determine which user space contains a copy of the article. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 16:09, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hamish and Andy's Euro Gap Year

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

Not notable. Announces a future TV program. Only citation is announcement on a gossip page. Web search found only repeats of the announcement on fan sites and media outlets. Previous season Hamish and Andy's Gap Year is most notable in reliable sources for losing more than half its audience as the season progressed although a loyal fan base remained. Although this TV program may become notable in the future, it is too early for an article in WP. DocTree (talk) 04:21, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:44, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Meh. I'll probably get called out for crystal balling, but there's no doubt that this show will be notable once it begin airing in a few months. These guys are two of the biggest names in Australian TV/radio, Hamish and Andy's Gap Year won "Most Popular Light Entertainment Program" at the recent Logie Awards and Hamish Blake won the Gold Logie, basically the biggest award in Australian television. The show has already began to get a little bit of coverage in major media sources, e.g. Herald Sun, The Age. Basically, although it would probably be in line with policy/guideline to delete the article, I'm not seeing any benefit in doing so, because we will have to recreate it in a month or two. Jenks24 (talk) 03:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A few problems: Logie Awards for 2012 results are unsourced but the external link in that article, http://tvweek.ninemsn.com.au/blog.aspx?blogentryid=1001386&showcomments=true, indicates that Spicks And Specks (ABC1) was chosen as "Most Outstanding Light Entertainment Program," not Hamish and Andy's Gap Year. I found references to "Most Popular Light Entertainment Program" in unreliable blogs and the WP Logie Awards article but the official site and reliable sources list the category as Most Outstanding... rather than Most Popular.... The Logie Awards of 2012 article's unsourced Winners and nominees table appears inaccurate. It was tagged {citation needed} on 16 April and can properly be deleted by any editor. What you refer to as "a little bit of coverage in major media sources" consists only of repeats of the promotional announcement about plans for the show and are not substantial or reliable. If Hamish and Andy's Gap Year actually did receive a Logie Award, please provide some verifiable citations from reliable sources. DocTree (talk) 18:29, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*shrug* This is one of those things that's obvious from my point of view – I watched the awards so of course I know they won. Anyway, there are two awards for most categories, "Most Outstanding ..." and "Most Popular ...", but I can understand that you didn't know that; here are a few articles that mention Hamish and Andy winning Most Popular Light Entertainment Program [1], [2], [3], [4] – all reliable sources.

About the mentions in newspapers, those articles are from the Herald Sun and The Age, two of the biggest newspapers in Australia – to dismiss them as unreliable is ridiculous. I do, however, agree that they are not substantial – if I did think they were substantial coverage I would have voted "keep" rather than "meh" :) Jenks24 (talk) 10:24, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy until it airs, per CRYSTAL. Softlavender (talk) 12:01, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy per User:Softlavender above. - Jorgath (talk) ^(contribs) 18:16, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hamish & Andy until something notable actually happens. Bazonka (talk) 11:20, 18 May 2012 (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.