Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Austrian television series

Add links
Source: 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 was no consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 04:52, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of Austrian television series

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

List of Austrian television series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per

WP:NOTDIR says we should NOT have! No years, genres, sources, actors, writers, channels, et cetera, are provided. It's open-ended too. Basically, creator dumped the categorization system into an article. A simple copy-paste comes complete with letters. Someone else later added italics. gidonb (talk) 04:02, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

We just don't know if this one day would become a valid list. Maybe yes, maybe no. We cannot crystal ball. As things stand,
WP:NOTDIR applies. gidonb (talk) 23:11, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
We don't know that any stub created in the history of Wikipedia will ever be expanded. We create articles in good faith and trust to the wisdom of the masses that eventually it will become a good article. I would argue that a comprehensive List of Austrian series with basic details would be more worthwhile than having some stubs on series. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:10, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Same thing. We should not crystal ball that stubs will be expanded. Maybe they will, maybe not. It's all good. Stubs can and should have value as they are. When nominated, we judge articles on current merits (not on fantasies) and when an article is a stub, this PARTICULAR fact does works against survival. For example, a topic will be more likely to be fully contained (without hitting
WP:UNDUE) in the scope of another article, when all we have is a stub. On the other hand, stub status does not mean that an article will be necessarily deleted, merged, or redirected. Unless an extreme stub, the impact should be ONLY on the probability to survive and does NOT mean that it must go. gidonb (talk) 09:51, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
DF, could you please explain how this list article is "valid" when
WP:NOTDIR says that articles should not be simple listings without contextual information. Your opinion skips the policy-based deletion rationale and concentrates on the obvious (at least to me). Of course there is no problem with categories and directories (plus navigation boxes!) living side by side if all follow our policies and guidelines! That's NOT the point of the nomination. gidonb (talk) 22:46, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
What you link to links to Wikipedia:Stand-alone_lists#Selection_criteria which explains things better. Dream Focus 23:19, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it doesn't. Your link is about the criteria for inclusion in the list and what these criteria say about the list. Also important, but again NOT the focus of this nomination. This nomination is about the lack of context, detailed in the right there linked
Provide context for the reader. The idea is that categories (at WP by design limited to include notable items) and articles, including lists, have slightly different functions, HENCE categories and lists can live perfectly well side by side. All articles, including lists, must provide at least some context. Categories do not need to provide any context beyond location (as in narrower than, less narrow than) in the knowledge tree. By lack of context, bare lists and extreme stubs do not meet this very low yet very important article bar. gidonb (talk) 23:38, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Well said, gidonb. I think this sums up the situation nicely. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:07, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Lacks independent sources showing that
    WP:NLIST is met, and a category is better for navigational purposes. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:10, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Keep. The article could use improvement, with more sources and more information about each series. But the topic is certainly notable, as are the other lists in {{WorldTV}}. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:27, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails
    WP:NLIST and its done better in the category. scope_creepTalk 13:26, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • But it passes
      WP:NLIST with flying colors. The overall topic of the list is notable: whole books have been written about the Austrian television industry, e.g. Das österreichische Fernsehen in geschichtsphilosophischer Sicht, 1980. And the individual list items are notable in themselves, as TV series almost invariably are. Compare to List of British television programmes, which gives the genre for each entry, or List of French television series, which gives genre, English title, year, summary etc. This article could easily be upgraded to these standards. Is the nominator planning to propose the British and French lists for deletion too? Aymatth2 (talk) 14:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
      ]
  • Weak Keep - looks like a reasonable navigational list (related to Wikipedia:Contents). There was one redlink, which I removed. Also worth noting that as I started to click on the entries, we have an awful lot of articles that literally just say "X if an Austrian television series" and nothing else. I PRODded one, but came across a half dozen others just in the first dozen or so links. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:24, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Austrian television seems to be a very poorly developed area on here. It is to be expected as anybody who would likely watch it would be editing German Wikipedia. All of the stubs can be expanded, and missing articles on actors started. I don't want to spend my summer editing Austrian TV articles. There's 151 articles in the German Wikipedia category, I'm pretty sure most of them could be used to create a decent tabled list with some sourced facts.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:18, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I put the first 20 or so into a table using data from the German wiki. I suppose sources should be added. Not sure if alpha sequence is best, but the table is sortable. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:27, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The article has been restructured into a sortable table with genre, years, episodes, seasons, and some sample references copied from the German wiki. This should not affect whether it belongs in Wikipedia, since the discussion should be about potential, but invalidates the deletion arguments given above. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent job Aymatth, thank you. Notability can be seen in the German article links regardless of current status.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:41, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The German equivalent article, w:de:Liste österreichischer Fernsehproduktionen, is a bit broader in scope and has a lot more entries. It is organized chronologically, by decade, but I am not sure that is a good idea. This article has a sortable table, so readers can see it chronologically if they want. The German version has a column for "remarks", which does seem useful. Perhaps someone interested in the subject could translate these remarks for this list. I would also like to see an introduction covering the subject as a whole. There must be plenty of sources, but I do not understand German enough to take that on. Aymatth2 (talk) 23:04, 22 June 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Austrian_television_series&oldid=1094526134"