Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1982–1983 United States network television schedule (late night)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Sandstein 20:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1982–1983 United States network television schedule (late night)[edit]
- 1982–1983 United States network television schedule (late night) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This is an encyclopedia, not TV Guide. We don't need the TV schedule for 1982 on an encyclopedia. --Cocomonkilla (talk) (contrib) 01:19, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The nomination fails to go beyond WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Latenight TV programming from each year in the history of broadcasting has had substantial coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources, easily satisfying WP:N. For the 1982-83 season, for the Johnny Carson show see [1] 2110 Google News archive hits, including Time magazine [2] . The threat to Carson's show from his competition in the schedule is discussed at [3]. Carson's competition with Alan Thicke is discussed at [4]. Other articles also discuss the competition, Carson's sometimes slipping ratings with respect to the competition, and Joan Rivers becoming a regular guest host. An AP story April 12 1983, presented in NewspaperArchive,com in "The Capital" also discusses the scheduling ot=f the Thicke show against Carson, and Carson's loss of audience to Nightline, CBS movies, and independent stations. "David Letterman" gets 1670 Google News hits for that season [5] and again many are substantial coverage of the show and of its success in the schedule. "Nightline" gets 935 Google News hits during that season [6]. This is not at all TV Guide, which tells what is occurring in a particular day's episode of a program. It is a notable part of broadcasting history and a useful navigational aid. Edison (talk) 02:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I have no opinion on the presence of this or any other of the series of annual articles that the editor is in the process of creating, some of which have been Speedied in the recent past. However, please be aware that whatever decision is made the precedent will be set to either accept or remove all of the articles. As an aside, this editor has a history of removing Speedy and AfD tags without explanation - I've just reverted one for this AfD. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Precedent holds that such information is encyclopedic, and the nominator fails to indicate why this particular grid is unacceptable when there are plenty of other late-night grids (WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is not applicable). US television programming schedules are of encyclopedic interest and can be easily sourced. Doesn't violate any policy that I'm aware of, and is in fact covered off by several WIkiprojects, to boot. 23skidoo (talk) 03:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Artticle is wiki-worthy. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 03:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - per WP:INDISCRIMINATE - Wikipedia now catalogues outdated TV Guides, might as well catalogue the up to date ones. Since when the TV schedule of TV stations during some year is notable and worthy for an article? Let's do then foreign TV stations schedule. Oh, wait! We are already doing it... 2007 Australian network television schedule. Why stop there? Let's do cable and radio too. Everything that puts out an schedule we're cataloguing it! I am sorry for the sarcasm. EconomistBR 03:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment TV Guide tells who is on tonight's show, as was noted above. This article covers the programming schedule. There is a difference, and this difference is noted at WP:NOT. Other than "IDONTLIKEIT" what basis is there for removing an article with the many reliable and independent sources discussing it in depth noted above? The articles are not mere schedules or listings of programming. Please read the preceding comments before chiming in. Edison (talk) 04:37, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't worry, this list and others like will be kept, but TV schedule is not and never will be encyclopedic. We are the only ones treating old TV listings as if it were historical artifacts worth preserving. IMO the articles are indeed "mere schedules or listings of programming".EconomistBR 10:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- A "mere listing of programming" would say "April 6, 1983. Johnny's guests include Suzanne Pleshette and Calvin Trillin." or "November 23, 1982. David Letterman's guests are Grant Tinker, John Sayles and Harry Anderson." Now do you understand the difference between that and a schedule showing graphically what programs were on what networks at what times? This article is not TV Guide. Edison (talk) 22:31, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't worry, this list and others like will be kept, but TV schedule is not and never will be encyclopedic. We are the only ones treating old TV listings as if it were historical artifacts worth preserving. IMO the articles are indeed "mere schedules or listings of programming".EconomistBR 10:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment TV Guide tells who is on tonight's show, as was noted above. This article covers the programming schedule. There is a difference, and this difference is noted at WP:NOT. Other than "IDONTLIKEIT" what basis is there for removing an article with the many reliable and independent sources discussing it in depth noted above? The articles are not mere schedules or listings of programming. Please read the preceding comments before chiming in. Edison (talk) 04:37, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. WP:NOTDIRECTORY now explicitly excludes US TV listings: they are acceptable wikipedia content. It appears that one part of the divided community enforced their pro-life opinion through a policy while others probe changing consensus elsewhere. Either obtain consensus on WP:NOT, or close this debate as keep. NVO (talk) 06:21, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep useful index, verifiable, well scoped. Potatoswatter (talk) 08:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep per previous precedent and consensus established numerous times. The national network TV schedule for any given year is discussed substantially in reliable sources, as noted by Edison above. Schedules like these are covered in general in national magazines, newspapers, and specialized encyclopedias. Per the first pillar we incoporate elements of specialized encyclopedias (as well as almanacs, where you also can expect to find timetables). The explicit exemption of "historically significant programmes schedules" in policy is due to the perennial requests to delete such articles, which have continued to result in keep or no consensus to delete, including Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The US network TV schedule articles, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1997-1998 United States network television schedule, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1985-86 United States network television schedule (Saturday morning), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1983-84 United States network television schedule (Saturday morning), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2007-08 United States network television schedule, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1982-83 United States network television schedule, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1991–1992 United States network television schedule (late night). DHowell (talk) 22:27, 29 October 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.