Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Distinguished Artists

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. Tone 19:29, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Distinguished Artists[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is completely Unsourced and there is no information on the internet as such, there is an IMDB page for this TV show but that alone does not qualify it for a Wikipedia page of its own, It helps there is almost no other information about this TV show . Theprussian (talk) 16:29, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:45, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:45, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, article doesn't cite any sources whatsoever, and seems written in an almost promotional tone. Jeb³ _{Talk at me here} 16:53, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, the program appears to fail WP:NTELEVISION as it wasn't broadcast "on a network of ... television stations"(at least the article gives no indication of a network that it was broadcast on). PK T(alk) 16:57, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unsourced. Fails WP:GNG and NTELEVISION. As a Canadian, and one who is interested in the arts, I've never heard of the program let alone where this was broadcast. Was it a regional show? Was it only on TVO or maybe local cable access? Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:38, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. To be clear, this actually aired on TVOntario despite the article's failure to say that very clearly, so it would pass WP:TVSHOW if it could actually be reliably sourced. But TV shows are not exempted from having to have any sources just because they're technically verifiable as having existed, and I share the nominator's lack of success in finding any new sources that would bolster its notability at all — even on a ProQuest search to locate contemporaneous press coverage that wouldn't Google because this show is 15 years old, literally all I was able to find was a bunch of its own press releases about itself, with no evidence of a WP:GNG-worthy volume of journalistic reportage. Yes, we used to have a bad habit of allowing TV shows to have articles as long as their existence was verifiable, while being lax on the sourcing piece — but given the amount of advertorial spam about local public access shows and paid-programming infomercials that left us to contend with, we've tightened up our rules over the past 15 years, and the quality and depth and range and volume of the sources is now much more clearly the controlling factor. Verification of existence is still necessary, obviously, but is no longer sufficient in and of itself. Bearcat (talk) 20:14, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.