Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melissa (1964 TV series)


 * 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. (non-admin closure) — MarkH21talk 23:29, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Melissa (1964 TV series)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Is this show notable? GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

British TV show from 1964. Cited only to a book and IMDb. Since IMDb is not reliable, the only reliable source left is the book, although I don't know how much it covers it, it's important to know whether is a full page or several pages, or just a few sentences / one paragraph. Since I don't have this book, I can't evaluate it. I can't even access it since it is not cited as a book on a website, only the author, the title and the ISBN is featured. Google search returns several results about this show, but they are databases, the article itself, and the site of the BBC. The rest of the results are either about a 1974 show with this name, a 1997 one and multiple sites about actresses named Melissa, with TV shows included. So searching is a bit difficult. But anyways, based on my search, I don't think this is notable, but as always, I am happy to be proven wrong. And since this is a TV show from 1964, I can imagine there are print sources available from the time, but I can't track those down as I am not keen on that. So, what do you think about the notability of this show? GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:32, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:32, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:32, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. Series with a notable cast on a notable network. I think this puts it over the notability line. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:03, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * As the nominator mentions, they imagine there are print sources available for the time. We are supposed to assess articles based off the availability of sources, not their citation in the article. Given that the nomination themself suggests that sources likely exist, I'm not sure why this is at AFD and should be keep. matt91486 (talk) 16:14, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Like I mentioned, I cannot track those printed sources down. I couldn't find them online, and the Google search returned nothing of value. However, since this is a show from the 60s, there might be print coverage from the time. They are not presented though, that's why I started this Afd, to extend the number of sources. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 15:57, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * This isn't the purpose of AfD, though, to stimulate article improvement. matt91486 (talk) 16:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Have added some additional info. and citations to the article, if this helps establish its notability.Beryl reid fan (talk) 22:41, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   19:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. It is one of noted author Durbridge's body of TV work (few of his shows have pages), and has stood the test of time in that it is currently commercially available on DVD. Beryl reid fan (talk) 11:31, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:33, 3 April 2021 (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.