Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Incredibly Strange Film Show

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 KEEP. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 14:25, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Incredibly Strange Film Show

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

Contested PROD. Reason was " For this to remain we require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. IT has not come through the WP:AFC process, despite the banner announcing that it has done so. No notability is asserted nor verified."

Since the contesting of the PROD a pseudo-reference has appeared, but notability remains unasserted and unverified. Fiddle Faddle 13:55, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Jonathan Ross OBE is a notable English filmmaker, and this series is well documented in the article. I added another inline citation.--DThomsen8 (talk) 14:54, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep added few more reliable references from TV.com and IMDB. -Farhanimator (talk) 18:17, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep added more references and citations from the official production company's archives -Farhanimator (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Book Reference: ^[1] Web References: IMDB TV.com theTVDB [1] [2] -Farhanimator (talk) 08:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Numerous mentions in books on cult cinema indicate its importance (more refs added to article). It also plays an important role in the career of Jonathan Ross, one of British TV's biggest personalities. There was also a spin-off book which may have attracted reviews (there's one of the Italian translation here but I don't know if L'Indice is a reliable source[3]). I wasn't able to check newspaper archives, but there is very likely to be additional press coverage from the pre-internet era. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:25, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This Book [Ross, Jonathan (1993). The incredibly strange film book. London: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-0671712969.] is a later revision and spin-off to the show authored by Jonathan Ross himself.
Part of the problem is the use of psychotronics in the lead, which is grossly misleading, far as I can understand. This is a series about B movies. One ref, TV.com, mistakenly uses "psychotronic," and I wonder if the summary text there is in fact merely mirroring what was on Wikipedia? is that possible? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:48, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, I see, it's the little used term B_movie#Psychotronic_movie. I'll fix that in the lead. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:00, 20 April 2015 (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.

^ Palmer, Bill; Palmer, Karen; Meyers, Ric (2003). The encyclopedia of martial arts movies (1st paperback ed.). Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press. p. 466. ISBN 978-0-8108-4160-4.

[1] Palmer, Bill; Palmer, Karen; Meyers, Ric (2003). The encyclopedia of martial arts movies (1st paperback ed.). Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press. p. 466. ISBN 978-0-8108-4160-4.