Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 in American television


 * 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. Cleanup and and addtional sourcing appears to have addressed the deletion concerns. (non-admin closure) Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  01:13, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

2012 in American television

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Violation of WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL filled with unsourced and speculated informations. An article of a total mess. Definately not compatible with Wikipedia's mission of verifiability. Also we, at Wikipedia, aren't fortunetellers and we do not predict the future. Farine (talk) 14:18, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 07:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 07:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Don't delete it. We can find sources for this info. 68.44.179.54 (talk) 13:27, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Procedural Delete per nom. ClaretAsh (talk) 12:26, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not just a question of finding a source for it my friend. It's a question that such article should had never been created in the first place, because its creation does not follow the principles of Wikipedia.
 * Farine (talk) 14:09, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * What nonsense. Just because it's future information doesn't mean it can't be created. Try listing 2012 Summer Olympics for deletion and see how far you get. This article, while horrifically undersourced, is something that will happen. It needs cleaning up, not deletion.  Lugnuts  (talk) 16:57, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's not compare oranges and apples here. The 2012 Summer Olympics will happen. The article 2012 in American television in itself will happen, but not necessarily the shows that are listed on it and which make up its entire content. All of the shows announcements on this page are subject to cancellation at any time until the dates actually happens. For example, an announcement can come up in the mean time saying that the return of the Ricki Lake Show that is currently scheduled for September 2012 has been postponed or cancelled. That's why we avoid these types of pages and edits as much as possible because they are not reliable. I would suggest that you take a look at the WP:CRYSTALBALL guideline. Thank you. Farine (talk) 18:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe you should re-read WP:CRYSTAL too. The opening line from point 1 states "1.Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place". Notable. Check almost certain to take place. Double check.  Lugnuts  (talk) 06:58, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Just so that we keep track of the votes here, that makes 2 votes in favor of to keep (68.44.179.54 and Lugnuts) and 2 votes in favor of to delete (Farine and ClaretAsh) Farine (talk) 17:58, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a democracy. See also WP:NOTAVOTE. - The Bushranger One ping only 10:18, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment&mdash;This article should be userfied by the primary editor(s). It's only a couple of months away. Regards, RJH (talk) 21:36, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Lugnuts raises a good point, but I think the article should be deleted unless we can find more sources that prove that these events are almost certain to take place (WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL). Chris (talk) 21:11, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment as the 2012 US TV will occur unless TV ends in America because of some apocalypse, why not just move this to the Article Incubator for the next two months? 70.49.126.190 (talk) 04:25, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as per WP:CRYSTAL Stuartyeates (talk) 01:51, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * So which bit of CRYSTAL applies? Have you actually read the policy you're citing?  Lugnuts  (talk) 09:13, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 21:50, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. To say this violates WP:CRYSTALBALL is to say that there is nothing verifiably scheduled in American television for the year 2012.  Which is so incorrect as to be absurd to assert.  First, the American TV season lasts from fall of one year to spring of the next.  So everything that has not yet been canceled that has been picked up for a full season qualifies as verifiably scheduled for 2012.  Yes, a show could get canceled in the meantime, but that would simply be a change in what is verifiably scheduled to occur, that does not mean that nothing is currently verifiably scheduled to occur.  Even apart from the extension of the current TV season into next year, there are also many verifiable examples of television series scheduled to return in 2012, or that have been renewed for 2012, had anyone !voting "delete" actually bothered to research it: Mad Men, Game of Thrones, The Simpsons, American Dad, How I Met Your Mother...  We do not delete what is verifiable just because it isn't verified within the article at present, nor do we delete entire articles just because portions might be flawed.  I see this kind of crap in AFD after AFD.  Sometimes it's from a good faith misunderstanding of guidelines, as I'm going to attribute to Farine here, but often it strikes me as laziness, a mere WP:VAGUEWAVE in service of WP:IDONTLIKEIT.  Too many deletion noms and !voters are not following WP:BEFORE, they are not following WP:PRESERVE, and they are not following WP:ATD.  And it all creates wasted effort in these AFDs, time that could be better spent improving articles that are improvable, such as this one.  postdlf (talk) 22:43, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete At this point the entire article smacks of crystal balling, even the few verified events (which are always subject to change). There will be no harm creating this again in December (when there will be actual cites and "look-ahead" articles) and perhaps a user incubation is in order for the larger list portions so they don't have to be redone later. But for now we cannot use it in its current form, and in some form, the TV project has to create guidelines on timing when a yearly schedule or events article should be created; it's embarrassing to me and the hard-working part of our project when articles like 2012–13 United States network television schedule (sucessful AfD) are created when nothing is known at all and tenuous sourcing is used.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 01:28, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per exception 1 of WP:CRYSTAL. There's plenty of information already in the article that deletion is not a viable option. Umbralcorax (talk) 02:18, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Inexplicably, User:Crw21 removed my comments from a week ago (see here. Copying again as I wrote it then:
 * Keep but get rid of the "continuing shows" section. There are events that are likely to happen in American television in 2012, but there is no guarantee that any of these shows will continue into next year. It would need to be sourced that it has been renewed for a full season or enough episodes that take it into next year; easier yet just add them back in when an episode of the show actually airs in 2012. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 00:40, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment Aside from userfying, is there any way this article could be put on ice until we reach 2012?  Claret Ash  12:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * What would be the point? It's not OK at 23:59:59 on 31st December, and then 1 second later, it is?  Lugnuts  (talk) 13:00, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Snowball keep per WP:HEY. I added 24 reliable sources so the nominator's claim of "unsourced and speculated informations" is no longer true. TomCat4680 (talk) 21:01, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep the date is fast approaching, will not fall under WP:CRYSTAL after January comes around, now has reliable sources, no reason to delete. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 01:29, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep If you have sources that say the shows will continue next year, so be it. If not, just remove them from the list.  The media gives ample coverage to the next seasons television shows, as others have demonstrated, finding coverage of certain shows that are renewed for next year, and who is going to be quitting a popular show, etc.   D r e a m Focus  21:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep A page such as this is justified as soon as there is reliable information to put in it, as there now is. The relevant policy is NOT TV GUIDE -- thee's no point publishing a TV guide before the programs are available, but we're an encyclopedia.  DGG ( talk ) 14:26, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - many, if not most shows, are already contracted, scheduled, and written; some are even being filmed for early 2012 as of late October 2011. The reality is that today, TV shows take many months to produce, write, direct, and film; and they are justified by their huge budgets in a weird, only-in-Hollywood circular reasoning ("You can't cancel Two and a Half Men, we've already dumped millions of dollars into it!").  It's not like the halcyon days of the 1950s, when TV shows were written and filmed in a week's time.  The vast majority of TV shows are renewed each year.  The article has been fixed per WP:HEY, so claims of crystal are false; if anything, snow is falling now. Bearian (talk) 00:54, 25 October 2011 (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.