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 no consensus. My personal sympathy lies with those !voting "delete", but even after two relists, no consensus seems to be forthcoming.
Randykitty (
talk) 17:33, 3 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Comments If it's scheduled to take place, as the article claims, then surely there's a source for that? And can a
WP:HISTMERGE be done? LugnutsFire Walk with Me 07:49, 13 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:20, 19 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Comments Page has been updated with relevant information, officially released by MTV via all its social media platforms.[1][2] Should be reviewed for discussion closure, article should be in compliance. User:Juwan1203(
My talk page) (
My edits)03:01, 24 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:35, 26 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep Further information, such as nominations, honorees, presenters, etc. will be disclosed by MTV in the following weeks, article should be updated with references when above are officially released. User:Juwan1203(
My talk page) (
My edits)08:39, 26 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete/merge. No indication those awards/events are notable on yearly basic. Likely all of the articles in this series should be merged to the parent article. This is of course a widespread problem, many yearly award pages are not notable. Ditto for yearly sport events. But who wants to touch that can of worms? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 10:42, 26 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep While I see
Piotrus's point about the lack of notability of each yearly event, the MTV awards are significant as far as awards shows go. Now that the article has been updated with information about the award show itself, it should be kept.
Balon Greyjoy (
talk) 12:34, 26 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep The unsourced garbage/wild mass nom guessing/awards fans detritus has been hauled out, and it's now sourced as well as it can be for now. Nate•(
chatter) 03:35, 28 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Zero article. There is the promise of something, and that is not how Wikipedia works. Literally nothing. The promise of something is not
WP:GNG I will vote to keep after there is a show.
Matt294069 Lubbad85 (
☎) 03:17, 1 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment Do we expect MTV to suddenly self-destruct and go off the air permanently in the interim 48 days, the Barker Hangar to collapse into a heap, Zachary Levi to have something tragic happen to him, or for everyone to refuse their honors, thus meaning there will be no show? It's going to be held, there's no question about it. Nate•(
chatter) 21:01, 1 May 2019 (UTC)reply
WP:TOOSOON there is no article until it happens . Making an article early.
WP:NORUSH what is happeniong? Just trying to be first? I did not even vote, I made a comment. But now I will vote. Lubbad85 (
☎) 03:07, 2 May 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Lubbad85: Let me make a few things clear, if you were unaware:
I have been creating/editing these pages for 7 years, and this is normal procedure. As MTV does not release information for these events all at once, presumably advert/marketing strategy (i.e. presenters, performers, etc.), we can only update the page with official information provided by them, as they wish to release it on their schedule.
Secondly, Google sources the information from these pages to fill knowledge panels for its search queries (see screenshots or Google each year of MTV Movie/Movie&TV Awards to see for yourself). So, creating the page “early” ensures people who search for the show are not misinformed, including other major news outlets, who also source Google’s results.
The only reason we are even having this discussion is that an inexperienced editor, with these articles, created this page with inaccurate information and references. Although, in my opinion from what I saw, I don’t believe this user maliciously created the page (i.e. vandalism); the article was flagged, due to the information he or she provided at the time. This threat of deletion happens every year.
Frankly, I am over this sh*t. Does it really make sense to delete a page, only to recreate it in 2 months? If you want to create this page from scratch, including nominees, winners, send Google info plus handle vandalism of all of it from unregistered users (i.e. ID’d by IP) on June 17th, be my guest. And yes, we are just trying to get a headstart.
I plan on closing this discussion tomorrow (in accordance with deletion policy - 7 days after relisting), unless anyone has anything to add to the discussion.
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.