Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2006 Australian network television schedule

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 no consensus. Not only is there no consensus here, but there is no consensus here either. Please hash it out there before flooding AfD with every such list. NW (Talk) 13:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2006 Australian network television schedule

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

The prod was contested in December 2008. Television schedules do not belong in an encyclopedia. Joe Chill (talk) 18:39, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:33, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Same response as the one given for "2007 Australian network television schedule" directly above. These probably could have been put in the same nomination; although if they had been, someone else would probably have complained about that as well. Mandsford (talk) 20:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: If television schedules are so important why not create television schedule instead of making a directory of old TV Guides? Even an old TV Guide has no historical significance. What you guys are saying is that old TV Guides from 2008 and below are historically significant without explaining how it is. Whenever anyone posts links, it always shows notability for television and not the individual old TV Guides. Joe Chill (talk) 00:33, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Husband: I'm going to throw away last years TV Guide.
Wife: Don't! Copy it onto Wikipedia!
Husband: Why?
Wife: The TV Guide is historically significant now that it's a year after.
Husband: Okay. I'll type this up on Wikipedia.
Wife: Get my mom's old TV Guides from the attic and type those up also! Joe Chill (talk) 00:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Keeping such articles about the schedule (as opposed to daily programming) is consistent with WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a directory which says "..historically significant programme lists and schedules (such as the annual United States network television schedules) may be acceptable." The networks schedule should not be trivialized and misrepresented as mere "TV Guide," which says what the program's episode will be on a particular day. In a given country, the network TV schedules have typically been discussed in more depth in books, magazines, and newspaper media columns, than mere listings of the days programming. The scheduling choices, and their effects on the ratings of programs, are part of the subject matter of college courses in broadcasting and media. The schedule is a strategic choice of what program leads into a given program, and what the competition is in a time slot. They are not random. Edison (talk) 17:01, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per arguments I and others gave at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of United States network television schedules. Zagalejo^^^ 00:18, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Major media form and of permanent historical interest. We cannot copy old TV guides into here or Wikisource, because they are all of them still under copyright--and they contain much advertising material that is not encyclopedic, The schedule itself is what's proper material. We should probably add Harry and Louise to the list of irrelevant AfD arguments. DGG ( talk ) 03:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:NOTDIR . Niteshift36 (talk) 04:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, WP:NOTDIR applies. Stifle (talk) 10:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please read what NOTDIR actually says about TV schedules. Zagalejo^^^ 19:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 23:33, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; not encyclopedic. It also happens to be unsourced. This schedule implies that the same pograms were shown at the same time throughout the year; in fact variations did occur. Consequently the page is also misleading. Smile a While (talk) 21:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Nomination rests on incorrect reading of WP:NOTDIR; see generally my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of United States network television schedules. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:51, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Bduke (Discussion) 02:36, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE but is also unsourced and not isn't encyclopaedic for Wikipedia. It would be best suited on a Television history Wiki then here. Bidgee (talk) 11:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How does WP: INDISCRIMINATE apply? I understand the sourcing concerns but not this. Narthring (talk • contribs) 16:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as this schedule does not provide any commentary from reliable secondary sources that would indicate that the schedule is notable. --Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 13:33, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - As has been stated WP:NOTDIR allows television schedules. The real problem is the sourcing. I believe reliable sources exist but are not properly cited in the article. Assuming reliable sources can be found the article should stay. Narthring (talk • contribs) 16:48, 26 August 2009 (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.