Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/It Takes Two (1982 TV series): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:19, 22 May 2012

It Takes Two (1982 TV series)

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

Doesn't appear to meet the notability guideline for TV shows or the general notability guideline (contested prod) – hysteria18 (talk) 10:06, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Every TV series is notable, no matter how short-lived. This is bullshit. I did not invest precious time just for this nonsense to take place. ---numbaonestunna

Read the above mentioned policy. That this show only had a single season is an indicators in it's lack of notability. Please note that we aren't attacking you or your investment into creating this article. We're merely saying that as it stands right now there is reasonable demonstration of it's notability. Hasteur (talk) 18:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Only has 3 external link references. One is "The Complete Directory to Prime Time Network and Cable TV Shows" (an obvious collection of everything and not considering notability), the IMDB profile (which has been asserted several times as not reliable), and the TV.com listing of the site. These references suggest, at least to me, a lack of sources and reasonable notability for this series. Hasteur (talk) 18:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article needs cleanup for sure, but I don't see how it fails to meet notability guidelines. It ran on ABC, so that's a national scope. --BDD (talk) 18:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Look at the guideline In either case, however, the presence or absence of reliable sources is more definitive than the geographic range of the program's audience alone. For instance, a purely local talk radio program can be notable enough for inclusion if it played a role in exposing a major political scandal, and a national television program may not be notable if it was cancelled too quickly to have garnered any significant media coverage. In this case it was cancelled after one season. As far as I know (and based on the scrambling to find more/better sourcs we still have the same questionable sources. Hasteur (talk) 18:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

'Keep. The Complete Directory is reliable source enough. Apparently some of you are still new to Wikipedia---what else can explain the fact that you're not acknowledging all the other short-lived series that have had articles on here for a long time. It shouldn't matter if a series was popular or not, or whether or not it made an impact on the industry, society, etc. Ever since Wiki's existence, new articles have been made all the time for upcoming shows, many of them which get cancelled after short runs every year. Do we then decide to delete those articles just because the shows are no longer newsworthy. I mean, articles for The Class and Better With You were about one-season runs, and I highly doubt anyone is going to scrap those now, even if they were newsworthy at one time. Everything is notable if it involves a national TV production employing high-profile Hollywood writers, actors and other miscellaneous crew. Also, the actors who are involved with these articles in question deserve to have obscure shows accesible in blue links instead of in red (if you all catch my drift), so that readers can further get an idea of the sorts of projects they were involved with, beyond what they're most recognized for. Lastly, I have started on a separate article for Witt/Thomas Productions, and my goal is to have every one of their series listed have an active article. As for this page, I am sure archived news articles and press releases for It Takes Two exist..but realistically, you all are asking for more sources than what most short-lived series have on here. Time to be more aware. numbaonestunna

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 *'''Keep''' The article needs cleanup for sure, but I don't see how it fails to meet notability guidelines. It ran on ABC, so that's a national scope. --[[User:BDD|BDD]] ([[User talk:BDD|talk]]) 18:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 **Look at the guideline ''In either case, however, the presence or absence of reliable sources is more definitive than the geographic range of the program's audience alone. For instance, a purely local talk radio program can be notable enough for inclusion if it played a role in exposing a major political scandal, and a national television program '''may not be notable if it was cancelled too quickly''' to have garnered any significant media coverage''. In this case it was cancelled after one season. As far as I know (and based on the scrambling to find more/better sourcs we still have the same questionable sources. [[User:Hasteur|Hasteur]] ([[User talk:Hasteur|talk]]) 18:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
+'''Keep'''. ''The Complete Directory''' is reliable source enough. Apparently some of you are still new to Wikipedia---what else can explain the fact that you're not acknowledging all the other short-lived series that have had articles on here for a long time. It shouldn't matter if a series was popular or not, or whether or not it made an impact on the industry, society, etc. Ever since Wiki's existence, new articles have been made all the time for upcoming shows, many of them which get cancelled after short runs every year. Do we then decide to delete those articles just because the shows are no longer newsworthy. I mean, articles for ''[[The Class (TV series|The Class]]'' and ''[[Better With You (TV series)|Better With You]]'' were about one-season runs, and I highly doubt anyone is going to scrap those now, even if they were newsworthy at one time. Everything is notable if it involves a national TV production employing high-profile Hollywood writers, actors and other miscellaneous crew. Also, the actors who are involved with these articles in question deserve to have obscure shows accesible in blue links instead of in red (if you all catch my drift), so that readers can further get an idea of the sorts of projects they were involved with, beyond what they're most recognized for. Lastly, I have started on a separate article for [[Witt/Thomas Productions]], and my goal is to have every one of their series listed have an active article. As for this page, I am sure archived news articles and press releases for ''It Takes Two'' exist..but realistically, you all are asking for more sources than what most short-lived series have on here. Time to be more aware. [[User:numbaonestunna|numbaonestunna]]