Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Best of Times (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 delete.  MBisanz  talk 01:06, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

The Best of Times (TV series)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

unsourced, non-notable, mainly just a plot summary Jimfbleak - talk to me?  05:34, 18 June 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Non-notable television pilot burn-off back in the time when this was standard operating procedure for networks to offer "original summer programming" in the technical sense; attempted to try to say 'replacement for Square Pegs ' within the text, but the late August air date says this had absolutely no chance of getting a second episode or further notability, and no cult status to suggest any hope of expansion.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 23:23, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 02:06, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. The New York Times had a full review of this, which might suggest that other reviews may exist off-line for this 1983 program. (Standard entries also exist in on-line TV reference works, as one would expect.) --Arxiloxos (talk) 21:47, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:25, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:01, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete – For a TV pilot (only) to be included, you really need to establish notability before including. Very occasionally – e.g. Aquaman (TV pilot), Wonder Woman (TV pilot) – that happens. But most TV pilots simply don't raise to the necessary level of notability. A single NY Times review doesn't demonstrate that it does. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:55, 10 July 2016 (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.