Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/100 episodes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 05:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
100 episodes[edit]
Looks like OR to me. Unless this is a really pervasive industry phenomenon, then I think this needs to be deleted. mgekelly 07:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Notable element of television. Cvene64 08:19, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This is notable in the television world. It should probably be re-written to make that clearer, though. --Dakart 08:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per above. -- Shizane talkcontribs 09:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This is, in fact, a "pervasive industry phenomenon". 23skidoo 14:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I've added multiple citations from reliable sources. --Metropolitan90 15:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, notable TV programme. --Terence Ong 15:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per above. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 17:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep per Dakart. M1ss1ontomars2k4 (T | C | @) 18:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep and cleanupMerge and redirect as per below comment. Probably very little worth merging, but just a note about the (possible) significance of 100 eps might be worth a mention. --InShaneee 19:46, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]- Redirect to television syndication. While the 100 episode mark may be important in the industry, the article is original research, particularly the reasons given for success and failure of shows, which makes up the bulk of the article (Also, I believe some of them may be incorrect, but I would have to do some research to verifiy this). -- Kjkolb 20:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Article has been improved somewhat and I think it should stay and be further improved. Definitely notable. Grandmasterka 01:38, 30 May 2006 (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.