Draft talk:Meta Runner

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Meta Runner redirect.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

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

	Australia portal Meta Runner is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
	This redirect is supported by WikiProject Australian television.

Animation: Television

	Animation portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
	This redirect is supported by the Animated television work group.

Article cleanup needed

This entire article reads more like a fandom page than an encyclopedic one, and grammar errors frequently re-appear. Just thought I'd bring it to attention. 50.232.92.83 (talk) 15:36, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol peer review

Onel5969, I agree that this subject's notability is not quite there. I'm curious about your decision to move the article to draft--was this purely because of the amount of work already put into the article, or was there another reason? _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:23, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Partly because of the amount of work, but also because I was unsure of the notability. Web Series are not as quite straightforward in terms of notability as tv series. If I had felt that the article failed notability, I would have prodded it. By moving it to draft, I felt I gave the editor a chance to provide the in-depth referencing to show notability, as well as simply needing more refs for verification purposes. It's interesting that an AfC reviewer (and one I've grown to respect over the years) has also found sourcing lacking since I moved it to draft. I'm going to leave a comment on the draft as well. Thanks Rosguill. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:33, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969 and Rosguill: Onel5969, my assessment follows yours and I also would have draftified rather than gone for a deletion process. The amount of material in the article makes me think that there may be sources that have been used but not referenced; moving to draft gives the author an opportunity to fix this in their own time, rather than while having AfD breathe down their neck. On the other hand, it may demonstrate that no such sources can be provided, which makes any subsequent deletion discussion more straightforward. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:47, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because it is unlikely that there will be any proper sources soon. After all, this is a fan series, not an official series by some TV production company. --Davidng913 (talk) 13:15, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]