- 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 08:13, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Super Bowl XXVII halftime show (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Bowl XXVII halftime show Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- A badly formatted, redundant WP:CFORK of Super Bowl XXVII, and a List of Super Bowl halftime shows is already here. Excelse (talk) 05:25, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Babymissfortune 10:42, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Babymissfortune 10:42, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Babymissfortune 10:44, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep substantially covered in reliable independent sources including those already cited in the entry. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:40, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep abundant coverage clears WP:GNG easily. Much more information than can be found in a list or main article.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:32, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Per above. Awardmaniac (talk) 22:18, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep As the show was the reason the NFL started booking highly popular singers to perform at the show. Michael's performance brought viewers back after the NFL lost viewers the previous year with its halftime show because of Fox's counterprogramming. (120.144.141.153 (talk) 03:46, 5 February 2018 (UTC))[reply]
- Keep. Meets WP:GNG, per all above. Not all Super Bowl halftime shows are notable, but this innovative and ground-breaking one definitely is. Ejgreen77 (talk) 03:54, 5 February 2018 (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.