Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ceasar and Chuy

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 except signature updates.

The result was no consensus to delete; default to keep - Philippe | Talk 02:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ceasar and Chuy

Not notable. —BradV 01:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable. Renee (talk) 02:08, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless someone provides indication of notability, such as comments about them in a non LATV media course.--House of Scandal (talk) 19:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
DO NOT DELETE ARTICLE Very notable article.

Links to Ceasar and Chuy on other media besides LATV:

1)TV GUIDE: http://www.tvguide.com/detail/tv-show.aspx?id=7266925

2)http://www.1888pressrelease.com/ceasar-and-chuy-to-host-amateur-night-pr-2if4431zh.html

3)http://www.hispanictips.com/2007/10/30/ceasar-chuy-latv-latv-signs-over-man-productions-comedic-series-ceasar-chuy/

This is a legit show/production which gets some of the highest ratings in its demographic. There is no reason for deletion. --Qreyes

Note: The author (User:Qreyes) has made further contributions to the article. —BradV 22:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While the article still needs a lot of work, with the author's contributions, as well as those of an anonymous IP who I assume is the editor, the article is already nine times larger than it was at nomination. The author has provided more reliable references for this show, establishing notability. There is a clear incentive to improve the article, and with the help of any relevant WikiProjects, this should turn out to be a very good article. Let 'em work on it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I have tagged the article as a possible conflict of interest, as I suspect the author (Qreyes) is tied to the show. The username is similar to one of the authors (Keu Reyes). Also, three images that were on the article before they were speedied were listed as original work. The images were similar to those found on Google Images, but were not identical, which suggests that the contributor had access to original unpublished images. All of this is purely circumstantial evidence, but is important enough to be noted here. —BradV 21:23, 5 March 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.