Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1775 (TV pilot)


 * 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. § FreeRangeFrog croak 17:28, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

1775 (TV pilot)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable television pilot that wasn't picked up as a series, joining the thousands of other failed television pilots failing WP:N and WP:GNG. -- Wikipedical (talk) 17:20, 8 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Not all failed television pilots have Wikipedia pages and there is a respectful category for                                                                                         Television pilots not picked up as a series --Riadse96 (talk) 20:47, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I never said a failed pilot cannot have a Wikipedia article. This particular failed pilot is not notable.  I'm confused as to how presenting that category justifies/clarifies a 'keep' vote for this particular article.  --  Wikipedical (talk) 21:27, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passes GNG with coverage in multiple sources, including a substantive Variety review; no compelling reason to delete it. --Arxiloxos (talk) 07:28, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 09:25, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak keep Listed sources are mostly a bit on the brief side but enough info for an article. But it's probable that a new sitcom with such a well-known star would have additional print reviews that aren't online. At the very least, info should be merged to Ryan O'Neal (which is very short on his acting career).--Colapeninsula (talk) 14:15, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * 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.