Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wish Gone Amiss Weekend

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:20, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wish Gone Amiss Weekend[edit]

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

Lingering Disney Channel Original Series cruft dealing with a block of three of the network's series having episodes revolving around shooting star wishes in 2007 and airing on the same weekend, but unlike many of these events, there were no crossovers, just three versions of the same plot. Likely nobody else besides the kidvid crufters cared in 2007, and they don't now in 2013, and when they do air, certainly not in a block. Sources are press releases, a copyvio YouTube vid of a promo, and a review from a Disney-centric site that despite their Disney bias thought marketing the episodes as a DVD release was 'banal' and 'hackneyed', along with the usual overlong plot synopses which don't belong here. Only links are into templates, 'list of episodes' articles and lingering episode articles yet to be merged into their season articles. Nate • (chatter) 03:15, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:47, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:47, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:08, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:40, 10 November 2013 (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.