Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Second Holmes


 * 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. Discussion is clearly against keeping, although whether a new discussion would have the same result remains to be seen — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:48, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Second Holmes

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence that this series meets the notability criteria. A couple of press-releases exist, but no significant coverage can be found. The coverage that I could find mentioned the producer, but did not even verify the cast member details. Searches are not helped by several false hits, like "xxx second, Holmes did xxx"; "second. Holmes did..." and also several mentions in the press (especially between about 1895 and 1915) about someone being a "Second Holmes"  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 12:44, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * And what about the source cited in the article, which does verify cast members among other details? Phil Bridger (talk) 12:53, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * My apologies, the cast were indeed mentioned in a sentence! I have strucken the relevant section. However, this is pretty much the only coverage I could find (others were basically the same article, either through a press-pool system, or because it was based on a press release). One source is not sufficient to meet the criteria for inclusion.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 13:18, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 12:48, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep this was a radio show that was short lived and we have numerous entries for such like it. results like [] show me that there is coverage for it. See also [], and [] indicate it does have minor notability. Especially because this was a BBC production makes this notable. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 12:56, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The Google results are mostly blogs, fan sites or download sites - none of which are traditionally counted as reliable sources as Wikipedia defines the term. The Cambridge Explorer link is a listing on a Sherlock Holmes fan site. The Radio Times link is useful but it should be born in mind that until 2011, it was a BBC publication and so not independent. It should also be noted that being a production by the BBC does not automatically make it a notable production!  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:51, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * In my opinion this is similar to artists that are signed by a major lable, inherently notable. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:31, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak keep - the fact the series was picked up and written about in an American newspaper indicates to me it was notable enough at the time. It was broadcast 30 years ago, pre internet. The Wikpedia article is short and to the point. Sionk (talk) 13:55, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, the fact that the majority of the sources I could find were American newspapers was intriguing... I couldn't find UK sources! However, as mentioned above, these appear to be based on a press release (or an article that was pooled between different papers), so it is in effect one source (and if based on a press release, not an independent one at that!). I appreciate the fact that it was pre-internet, and sources are harder to find - but looking through various books about TV in my local large library did not find any mentions! Unfortunately, I don't have the time to look through the newspaper archives from 1983 to see if there is a mention (although I would not be surprised if they would turn out to be the same as the American articles almost word-for-word). If I get a chance next week, I'll see if I can do so.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:51, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Elementary The show is detailed in the Sherlock Holmes: Screen and Sound Guide and other works of Sherlockiana such as The Baker Street Journal. Warden (talk) 00:03, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you confirm that there is detailed information in the Screen and Sound Guide? GBooks shows "Sherlock Holmes (The Second Holmes). BBC Radio 4, January 2 to February 6, 1983, 7:00 to 7:30 PM. W: Grant C" but no further than this - is it just a list of cast, or is there more discussion that that? Also, do you have some copies of TBSJ which discuss this in more detail than just dates and cast listing - online I can't find their archives of this, but it's not helped by the numerous mentions of "The Second Holmes story The Sign of the Four" and similar. With a couple of citations added to the article of detailed information sources (again, not just an episode list or a cast list), then I'd happily withdraw this nomination - I was unable to find them, but I don't have access to suitable offline sources, all the ones I could find in my local large library in Croydon didn't mention it!  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 10:26, 3 March 2013 (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.