Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1991–1992 United States network television schedule (late night)


 * 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   no consensus. An editor below had requested a link to the previous AfD(s), at least one is here: Articles for deletion/The US network TV schedule articles. Cirt (talk) 11:17, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

1991–1992 United States network television schedule (late night)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Articles are unsourced and do not assert their own importance. — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 07:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following (if they still exist anqualify): — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 07:51, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 1954-1955 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1955-1956 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1956-1957 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1957-1958 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1958-1959 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1959-1960 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1960-1961 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1961-1962 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1962-1963 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1963-1964 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1964-1965 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1965-1966 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1966-1967 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1967-1968 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1968-1969 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1969-1970 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1970-1971 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1971-1972 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1972-1973 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1973-1974 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1974-1975 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1975-1976 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1976-1977 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1977-1978 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1978-1979 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1979-1980 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1980-1981 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1984-1985 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1985-1986 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1986-1987 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1987-1988 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1988-1989 United States network television schedule (late night)
 * 1967–68 United States network television schedule
 * 1967–1968 United States network television schedule
 * 1990s CTV prime time schedules
 * Any other bluelinks on United States network television schedules (late night) that qualify
 * Comment The nomination is ill-formed by not noting previous AFDs such as . Would the nominator or someone else please link to all previous AFDs for all these articles? That might head off WP:DRV. I will assume good faith from Jeff G., that he simply did not know that these articles had been through AFD before, nominated by Jeffrey O. Gustafson. Edison (talk) 19:37, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all, Wikipedia is not a TV guide, and certainly is not a TV guide from the mid-20th century. Stifle (talk) 10:22, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I propose to add to the nomination United States network television schedules (late night), which will be only redlinks if this discussion results in a delete decision. Stifle (talk) 10:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Some discussion on what programs the major channels have historically sent may be covered in the articles on the channel. However, this raw timetable data is source material, not encyclopedia material. Sjakkalle (Check!)  10:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as pure listcruft, even if moderately interesting. Eddie.willers (talk) 11:47, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete This is primary material, not encyclopedia articles. Put it someplace else on the Internet. Redddogg (talk) 12:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 *  Strong Delete Not encyclopedic to say the least. Eatabullet (talk) 12:43, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   —Dl2000 (talk) 16:13, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete All including United States network television schedules (late night). Wikipedia is not a TV guide and I would also argue that it is these lists fall under WP:NOTREPOSITORY in that it is not a "Mere collection of public domain or other source material." Television schedules are source material, public domain, and widely available. We also are not a mirror of TV.com and the like. This and other such lists are not encyclopedic and do not add to the body of knowledge here. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 16:20, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Destroy them all! — Wikipedia is not a directory for these sort of things. MuZemike  ( talk ) 16:52, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not seeing a particularly strong reason to delete these (assuming they can be sourced, that is). Someone doing research into TV programs would certainly find these useful. It's good to know which programs were competing with each other at a given time. And in case people weren't aware, many similar articles have survived AFD in the past. Zagalejo^^^ 18:59, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep all Each year's network TV schedule is discussed substantially in reviews in national media, as are all the programs, so they can be sourced. For 1991 and 1992 late night programming, the year selected for the main AFD entry, see Google News archive . Each programming slot gets discussed in relation to its competition, who was the host before, and who might follow as host. See which notes the late night competition between Arsenio Hall and Johnny Carson's designated successor, Jay Leno. Many of the article are unfortunately behind paywall. Dennis Miller versus Arsenio Hall versus Johhny Carson is discussed at . The 1992 late night schedule is reviewd at . The prime time schedules also have received substantial discussion in reliable sources every year there has been television broadcasting. Books have been written about TV schedules and programs for many of these years. The nomination is illformed and one big "IDONTLIKEIT." Edison (talk) 19:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * First, Keep 1967–1968 United States network television schedule and its redirect 1967–68 United States network television schedule. Why was this year singled out over other schedule years? Furthermore, the 1967-68 article was sourced in a References section, contrary to this AfD's claim.
 * Secondly, there's nothing new presented in the AfD that hasn't already played out in Articles for deletion/The US network TV schedule articles, etc., other than that most articles in this case are the less-prominent late night schedules. There are also plenty of non-arguments here such as WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC and WP:ITSCRUFT. As for WP:NOT, see its point 3 which tolerates historic lists such as United States network television schedules - NOT#DIR is not a sufficient ground for deletion in this case.
 * Thirdly, specifically for 1990s CTV prime time schedules, like the 1967-68 article this is one of those things that are not like the others. Dragging the 1990s CTV into this mass-nomination is hardly good practice. A mass AfD should stick with the common theme, in this case limiting to U.S. late night schedules. That said, the 1990s CTV list is not substantive, and should Merge to the relevant Canada-wide schedule articles such as 1998–1999 Canadian network television schedule. However, much work remains to do on Canadian television information - let's not WP:DEMOLISH that house.
 * Fourthly, the "Any other bluelinks on United States network television schedules (late night) that qualify" is too vague to be acted upon for AfD purposes. Articles need to be individually identified for AfD. And just what is supposed to be meant by "qualify" here?
 * Finally, for the late night lists, historical schedules are valid lists which provide context of television history, how programs of each network have competed according to timeslot. However, some of these are not substantive and could merge to the main schedule article. For example, 1954-1955 United States network television schedule (late night) only indicates The Steve Allen Show, therefore it seems better to merge that info to 1954–1955 United States network television schedule. But the extent to which merging should be done (all year? some? none?) is best done as a project discussion outside an AfD e.g. at WT:TV before proceeding further. Therefore, No Action (Deletion or Merge) of late night schedules until this aspect is brought to a consensus. Dl2000 (talk) 20:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep all Per Edison, Zagalejo, Dl2000 and the previous AfDs. No real sourcing problem of course; the articles could be expanded to discuss changes and reasons for changes.John Z (talk) 20:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all Wikipedia is not a directory and this does nothing for the the encyclopedic value of Wikipedia. Tavix (talk) 23:39, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all this is an encyclopedia, not the TV Guide archives. I can't believe we're even having this discussion, people really will post anything to Wikipedia these days. JBsupreme (talk) 02:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Why isn't this encyclopedic? There are real world reference books that contain annual network TV schedules. The people voting to delete need more substantial arguments. Zagalejo^^^ 02:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay. An encyclopedia is supposed to consist of articles for people to read. A database of raw information should be maintained elsewhere on the Internet. There is no danger that something bad will happen and information not stored on Wikipedia will be lost.  Nor does this information somehow gain higher status by being on Wikipedia. Redddogg (talk) 05:26, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * So are we going to delete all lists and tables? What makes a network TV schedule worse than the articles at Category:Meteorology timelines, or the extended periodic table? I agree that this information could be stored somewhere else, but can't that argument be extended to every article here? (By the way, three of those links lead to dab pages.) Zagalejo^^^ 05:55, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess I got a little carried away with the wikilinking. :-) Since you asked, yes I think lists and tables should be removed unless they do something useful in the context of an encyclopedia -- like help someone find the right article, or they have some extraordinary importance -- like the Periodic Table. Redddogg (talk) 23:35, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That real-world reference books contain this material doesn't mean that encyclopedias contain this material. This argument is simply a non sequitur.  Xihr  09:48, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:FIVE says that Wikipedia incorporates elements of both general encylopedias and specialized encyclopedias. Surely Total Television counts as a specialized encyclopedia. Zagalejo^^^ 17:24, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep all of these and everything else in Category:Television schedules, per Edison and the fact that Wikipedia is not paper. This information is vital when dealing with the history of television, along with the articles in Category:Years in television. This material would be in a television encyclopedia so it's absolutely appropriate for Wikipedia. People are right, Wikipedia is not a TV Guide. But these lists are not issues of TV Guide. I don't see how these could violate WP:NOTDIR since that says "although mention of major events, promotions or historically significant programme lists and schedules (such as the annual United States network television schedules) may be acceptable." All of these lists have great historical significance. If people want the lists to have more sources, they should look for them. For example, 2008–2009 United States network television schedule has 33 refs. So I don't see how deletion is the answer. A decision to merge the late night schedules into the main list articles is another topic altogether. And speaking of precedent, there was no consensus to delete in any of these related AFDs      --Pixelface (talk) 07:11, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all obviously, and now even WP:SNOW delete all, per all the arguments. This is simply not encyclopedic.  Xihr  09:48, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Please read WP:SNOW before trying to apply it where it is inapplicable. Several editors have presented good-faith arguments that substantial coverage in numerous sources suport notability, and that the articles comply with all Wikipedia guidelines. Also as noted above the AFD is ill-formed and out of process and should be closed, since a mass of unlike articles are nominated, without noting previous AFDs which have resulted in articles being kept, and without clearly identifying the articles presented for deletion, due to the vague "Any other bluelinks on United States network television schedules (late night) that qualify" in the nomination. Edison (talk) 15:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all per Sjakkalle. Raw timetable data such as this is source material, not encyclopedia material.  Perhaps Wikisource would make a good home?  RFerreira (talk) 16:17, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Edison, others. Edward321 (talk) 22:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as all major  network shows will have Wikipedia articles, these lists serve usefully to organize the material. the shows produced by each network are notable, and the content is simply from the specific Wikipedia articles, which are invariably   well referenced at least in this regard. If the topics are notable, a list of them in any suitable and reasonable arrangement is a valid article. The earlier deleted articles should be reconstructed. DGG (talk) 02:23, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete To the other delete arguments let me add this: The article is perfect and complete as it is. All possible information is given, So then the wiki aspect of wikipedia is not needed. Steve Dufour (talk) 23:31, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, this is among the silliest arguments to delete I have ever heard! Assuming it is even true that all of these articles are perfect and complete—you are arguing that if we manage to get an article to a state of perfection and completeness, we should then delete it? Shall we also delete List of leaders of the Soviet Union? Since the country no longer exists, I'm pretty sure that list is also perfect and complete. DHowell (talk) 04:35, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. This is material one might expect to find in a television encyclopedia, and per the first pillar we incoporate elements of specialized encyclopedias (as well as almanacs, where you would expect to find timetables). Also, WP:NOT specifically allows for "historically significant programme lists and schedules (such as the annual United States network television schedules)." DHowell (talk) 04:35, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's useful. As per Edison, others, strongly agree with DGG.--Julián Ortega - drop me a message 18:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all. This is very trivial information, and Wikipedia is not a TV guide archive. Else why stop at TV schedules, how about one article per city and year listing the bus schedules of the time? -- Amalthea Talk 01:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yearly national network TV schedules are covered in national magazines, newspapers, and specialized encyclopedias. Are you able to find anywhere near that amount of coverage for local bus schedules? DHowell (talk) 05:42, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per Wiki is not paper. Deleting these does not help server space, the articles are potentially useful, and they don't harm anyone by existing. NuclearWarfare  contact me My work  01:37, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * keep per pixelface & DGG; seem like reasonably informative lists to me, epecially when taken together with the rest of category:television schedules. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 07:50, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per WP:NOTDIR: "mention of major events, promotions or historically significant programme lists and schedules (such as the annual United States network television schedules) may be acceptable"--emphasis on may be. Cosmic Latte (talk) 09:29, 18 October 2008 (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.