Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Very Important People (2023 TV series)

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 Draftify‎ per reasonable requests Star Mississippi 00:51, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very Important People (2023 TV series)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Can't find it passes WP:GNG. Literary no review at all. Twinkle1990 (talk) 14:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Internet, and United States of America. Twinkle1990 (talk) 14:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: Sourcing from the CBC is an interview with the host, but talks about the show. The Variety article shows this is up for an Emmy award and briefly talks about the show, also showing notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:28, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Week Keep? So you aren't sure for Keep? All interview is primary, not mounting to WP:SIGCOV as well as WP:GNG. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:31, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interviee is with the person, but it supports an article about the tv show. The Emmy nomination makes it notable rrgardless.Oaktree b (talk) 19:11, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Slight correction: The show has only been submitted for Emmy consideration; the official nominations won't be out until next week. That's why I didn't mention it anywhere in the article yet. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 20:01, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can wait until next week I suppose to see if it makes the final list for the award. Oaktree b (talk) 20:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Article creator here. Honestly didn't expect it to get to get promoted out of the draft space; I wasn't sure if it had enough, so I submitted it to get insight on areas for improvement, maybe see if coverage increases substantially should that Emmy nod go through. I'm not going to weigh in on whether the article should be kept since I'm obviously a little biased (though I will say starting a delete discussion minutes after someone accepts the draft doesn't seem kosher), but if it does get the axe, I'd prefer it get moved back to the draft space so I can continue source-hunting and working on improving it. Thanks much. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 16:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Coverage cited shows it meets the requirement for GNG. I cannot understand the nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which coverage? Please enlighten with STA. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what STA is. Examples of significant coverage and significant mentions, see page for sources of some.

Very Important People has seen host Vic Michaelis interview an assortment of characters that really can’t be described in just a few words. From Vic’s Ex-Step Grandmother (Lisa Gilroy) to Mental Health Advocate Tommy Shriggly (Zac Oyama), every improvisor brought a uniquely wild energy to Dropout’s short formseries, matched by Michaelis’ ability to perfectly adapt to every situation while keeping up their host persona. After being given full makeovers—including makeup, prosthetics and costumes—comedians come up with a character to sit down for a fully improvised interview.
(Deadline)

unique interview series
(Variety)

A sort of elevated reboot of an older CollegeHumor sketch, Very Important People tasks improv comedians with giving spur of the moment interviews after sitting through some truly incredible makeovers: ones that throw costumes and even prosthetics at blindfolded guests, leaving them transformed into aliens, misshapen body builders and, occasionally, screaming cavemen. That leaves Michaelis as the host: a character also named Vic Michaelis, though here they're playing a journalist who is in no way, they stress, the same person as themselves. That unflappable cable access-esque character is drawn from Michaelis's love of TV personalities from Carol Burnett, to Mary Tyler Moore, to Lucille Ball: all the "very physical femme comedians."
(CBC)

Dropout loves improv, so what better than to gather the cast, give them complete makeovers, and have them interviewed by Vic Michaelis, where they create their character based on the makeover they were given! (...)Very Important People is hilarious. It lets the cast get into their element and do what they do best. There are so many unforgettable and hilarious moments throughout the show, from mental health advocates to the second pig of the three little pigs. The show has a vibe and a type of humor that you can not find anywhere else, and for that, it definitely deserves a watch.
(Afterbuzz)

an improvised interview show, for the Outstanding Short Form Comedy, Variety or Drama Series category, as well as submitting its host, Vic Michaelis, for Outstanding Actor in a Short Form Comedy or Drama Series.
(134th St)

We don’t often talk about the niche streaming services at ScreenHub, but I can tell you right now that Dropout is definitely worth your time and money. Featuring improv comedy shows, live DnD games, and unique game shows lead by some of the funniest people in the US right now, this rebrand of College Humour has some excellent and unique offerings that set it apart from other subscription services. My favourite of the bunch at the moment is Very Important People, a show where comedians are put in a mystery costume and must come up with a character on the spot, before being interviewed, in character, by host Vic Michaelis.
(ScreenHub AU)

Mulligan also recently appeared on Dropout's Very Important People where Vic Michaelis and another comedian sit down for a fully improvised interview. The comedian who is the guest on this talk show has had a complete make-over with costume, prosthetics, hair, and make-up all changed to create a character who they will have to originate backstory for on the spot. Mulligan joked about how he doesn't remember anything from his time as Augbert, but praised Michaelis.

ScreenRant

And I will leave it at that. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: The show doesn't currently (article or elsewhere) have significant reliable independent coverage sufficient to meet GNG:

The CBC interview would be non-independent by default but some of it has additional significant independent qualitative coverage. (Y)
The Variety article only has passing coverage N
The Deadline interview is non-independent N
The Observer is a student newspaper and I believe while independent/reliable should have low weight (xref WP:UNIGUIDE) (Y)
The Polygon article is non-independent N
The Webby's award is a public web-vote and not the expert-voted Webby award, and is thus insufficient/unreliable for consideration of acclaim/impact. Even if it were the expert-voted Webby award I think it would be low weight given how many Webby awards there are (see the popup menus from the category sidebar at https://winners.webbyawards.com/winners) N

That said, I think it has a reasonable chance of an Emmy nomination given that its category is such an oddball one and there will be 5 nominees from only 22 on the longlist even before considerations of the 24000 eligible voter pool potentially skewing slightly in favour of Dropout, and Dropout fans really liking Dropout shows. If it is, then between the nomination and the second season and the awards We may sometime actually get sufficient independent qualitative coverage, but unfortunately it's not there yet for me.

(BTW, for anyone unfamiliar with the show, youtube has the first episode - enjoy)

^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 04:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update on this: The list for this year's awards has come out, and no Dropout productions were nominated. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 16:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The CBC article alone makes this pass GNG. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 06:15, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - entire AfD discussion seems to be in wrongway. The nomination was placed per lack of notability per minimal criterion but some are commenting that the CBC interview alone passes the criterion. Is it a rationale AfD discussion? If so, then we have to accept many AfC drafts with single coverage. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:12, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If nothing else, redirect to Dropout (media company) § Current and upcoming as an ATD. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 20:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - For Indian TV Series, we don't accept any draft not meeting WP:THREE concluding WP:SIGCOV. Then why this one should be exempted? I wished for a fair debate which is not yet demonstrated. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify per Hydronium Hydroxide's source analysis and the creator's request. I don't see sufficient significant coverage but it's reasonable to expect more. Contrary to one of the "keep" !votes the show has not been Emmy-nominated, just submitted for consideration, so it doesn't pass on those grounds. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:52, 21 July 2024 (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.