Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Accidentally on Purpose (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   redirect to Accidentally on Purpose (TV series). Notability hasn't been shown. There is already material on this pilot in Accidentally on Purpose (TV series), so this duplicates existing material. MMetro has the most appropriate solution.  SilkTork  *YES! 02:10, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Accidentally on Purpose (pilot)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No assertion of notability, and wholly unreferenced so no evidence of notability. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:17, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nomination. Subject shows little in the way of notability, plus none of the other episodes has a Wikipedia article. CarrotMan (talk) 13:43, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Peregrine Fisher (see discussion below). The information seems to be available, it just needs putting into the article. CarrotMan (talk) 10:46, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. I have no doubt that the series itself is notable, but I don't think it necessarily follows that each episode of a series is independently notable and warrants its own article. The article as it exists at this moment contains nothing that isn't already in the Accidentally on Purpose (TV series) article - that plot, episode data etc is all copied from the main Accidentally on Purpose article. Sarah 14:09, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect and Merge info into Accidentally on Purpose (TV series). Although individual episodes of a show often have their own article, it is usually after there is enough information to warrant a separate article. If the season that the episode is from doesn't have its own article, at the very least, there is a list of episodes separate from the main article. There's a lot of steps that have been skipped here, and a redirect to whatever is appropriate will be useful to a reader, will discourage the re-creation of the deleted article, but also keeps the article's spot in the hopes that a future Wikipedian can justify its existence. MMetro (talk) 21:51, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:16, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete As I said in the CfD discussion, there's no notability advanced in the article whatsoever- even an unreferenced claim to be notable. Further, I have looked twice and been unable to find any proof of notability. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 22:07, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - It's notable. I added a couple refs, although I only grabbed the smallest amount of info from each.  Someone can probably turn those two into about two paragraphs, but I've never seen the show, and don't really care about it. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 17:29, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * That's all very well, but why is it notable? Is the show particularly popular in America? Is the episode significant for some other reason? I realise notability can be something of a grey area, but my feeling here is that this episode doesn't quite make the cut. I'm open to other opinions, though. :-) CarrotMan (talk) 18:58, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Notability is based on coverage in reliable sources, per WP:NOTE. If a subject has been written about, we write about it.  If it hasn't been written about, then our rules say we shouldn't have a stand alone article on it. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 04:16, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, you've convinced me; there's no denying the existence of sources. Whether there are enough sources yet, I don't know, but I suppose it's a start. CarrotMan (talk) 10:46, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If there's gonna be any coverage of any episode of the show, it will be the pilot, since that is all that the reviewers often have to go on when they review a new show. MMetro (talk) 12:21, 31 December 2009 (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.