Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1949-1950 United States network television schedule (weekday)


 * 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. PeaceNT 10:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

1949-1950 United States network television schedule (weekday)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I have no doubt that this article was created in good faith, but NOT#A collection of indiscriminate information comes to mind... Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry 19:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - this isn't an indiscriminate collection of information. It's historical data, valuable for research into the early days of American broadcast television. See also Category:Television schedules. Otto4711 19:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Otto. Broadcast schedules are part of television reference books and are encylcopedic. Mandsford 20:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Might not be an indiscriminate collection of information. But I don't see the encyclopedic-ness or the usefulness of this article. Remember, we are an encyclopedia, not a TV guide. Chris!  c t 21:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * You don't think that someone studying the history of broadcast television would be looking for exactly this information? Do you really believe that someone trying to figure out what's on TV tonight is going to be looking for articles about th 1949 television season? Otto4711 21:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as un-encyclopedic. STORMTRACKER   94  21:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is a not a tv guide. Doctorfluffy 22:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note - user indefinitely blocked as disruptive sockpuppet. — xDanielx T/C 22:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Come on, folks, this is not "TV Guide", unless you have a way of tuning in signals from 1949. There have been numerous encyclopedic reference books about television broadcasting.  Maybe you're as tired as I am of seeing individual articles about Smallville episodes and Friends characters and similar dreck, but this is not the same thing.  Even persons who profess never to "watch TV" must acknowledge that television has been a major part of the cultural and economic history of the United States, as radio was in the decades before it.  Mandsford 00:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I think that this is a great concept and good archival information. I'd like to see the topic expanded to cover other years, but am wondering why it does not include the evening?  --Kevin Murray 00:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Check out the category linked in my comment above. Otto4711 01:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I am delighted to concur with some of the people here in establishing that at least some comprehensive lists are not indiscriminate.DGG (talk) 00:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I am quite surprise to hear that editors think this list is a good source of information. First, nobody would want to look at some old tv guide and find it useful. Even if someone really find it useful, the sources given in the article may not be reliable. Also for tv guide that happens many years ago might not be accurate and verifiable. Chris!  c t 02:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I found the article useful just from the time that I spent looking at it in considering the AFD. I had no idea that any television network ever carried UN General Assembly sessions! Think how someone researching the antecedents of C-SPAN would benefit from being able to look at that article. And why you would think that TV Guide can't serve as a reliable source is a mystery. TV Guide as far as I can tell qualifies under WP:RS and just based on articles I can remember reading in TV Guide I can think of a number of Wikipedia articles that would benefit from them as sources. Assuming that you're right about the sourcing, "poorly sourced" does not mean that there aren't other more reliable sources. There has been nothing offered here that remotely justifies deletion. Otto4711 03:30, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep This is in no way an indiscriminate list or a TV guide since the programs are no longer available for tuning in. It is in fact an important part of cultural history. It satisfies WP:N and WP:V on the basis of substantial coverage in numerous reliable sources, such as the New York Times historical archives, Time magazine  and other newspapers and books on TV history. It is clearly of encyclopedic notability, and it can be expanded and improved via the numerous sources available. Edison 03:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Historical television schedules certainly have notability. This is not "the TV Guide", which would show the broadcasts for every specific day, this is the seasonal schedule, which relates to the shows that followed or preceded each other and the shows that competed with each other. As synergy and competition are integral to programming decisions this is obviously not just random or happenstance. These are discriminate lists and most of them are sourced to some degree. --Dhartung | Talk 05:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Doctorfluffy. Bobby1011 07:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment There is an entire category created few less than a year ago, I'm interested to broadcasting history, both italian (and sardinian) and the rest of the world. I saw this category incomplete and I wanted in the spare time to add other years; with nick Bellame I did create weekday seasons 1968/1969, 1948/1949 and, last, 1947/1948. It's strange, in my opinion, that now you want delete an article leaving its own category. --Olbia merda 09:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is definitely not an indiscriminate list, or a TV guide, unless you're a time traveller, and the regular programming schedules for network television are very significant for understanding what U.S. culture was like in a time period. Pinball22 18:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment is there a WikiAlmanac this can be transwikied to? 132.205.99.122 20:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Per the first of the five pillars, Wikipedia incorporates "elements of general encyclopedias, specialized encyclopedias, and almanacs." Wikipedia is the WikiAlmanac. DHowell 22:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. The "Wikipedia is not a directory" policy specifically allows for "historically significant programme lists and schedules" and there is no doubt that the U.S. network television schedules each year receive significant coverage from multiple reliable sources, that they are historically significant, and that there exist currently published sources for this historical information. This is exactly the sort of thing that television historians document: See, e.g. Total Television, The Complete Directory to Prime Time Network and Cable TV Shows, 1946-Present, and The Encyclopedia of Daytime Television. These types of articles have also been nominated for deletion several times before and the result every time is not to delete: Articles_for_deletion/1997-1998 United States network television schedule, Articles for deletion/1985-86 United States network television schedule (Saturday morning), Articles for deletion/1983-84 United States network television schedule (Saturday morning), Articles for deletion/2007-08 United States network television schedule, Articles for deletion/1982-83 United States network television schedule, Articles for deletion/The US network TV schedule articles. Perhaps it's time we revise policy to make it even clearer that this type of historical information is allowed. (I also think we ought to make citing WP:NOT as a reason for deletion without citing one of its specific items a blockable offense criterion for speedy keep, but that would probably never fly). DHowell 22:16, 8 November 2007 (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.