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.
None of the sources provided in the article actually talk about the TV series or episode (whatever this article is - it isn't clear) and instead provide proof that the person cited existed in the world. There is one image in the article that talks about the TV series, a horse magazine which might be also involved in the production of this. Finally, I couldn't find any sources that talk about it online, which makes sense since it is from the early 90s, but I'm unsure how much reviews a PBS show about horses actually got. TL/DR this basically fails GNG. Gonnym (talk) 21:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: probably needs some WP:HEY work done, but this is one of those situations where we are dealing with the pre-google or early google era. There is also significance in that William Shatner was the celebrity host, he owned a Saddlebred farm and is quite an accomplished rider. Also the program won a national award which was (1) a first of its kind, and was (2) sponsored by what is now the United States Equestrian Federation, and received awards, which is notable. It also aired nationally long after its original debut as a special on PBS affiliates, but digging up old newspaper TV schedules is probably also a challenge. Montanabw(talk) 02:47, 20 October 2021 (UTC).[reply]
Comment. As the nom mentions, it's unclear whether this was a series or one episode of a series; if it was just one episode, it would be better to have an article about the series instead. In either case, this show apparently isn't even listed in IMDb. Five of the nine sources cited don't even mention this show, those being "Patricia Nichols Dies" (The Saddlehorse Report), "Saddlebred Legend Lynn Weatherman Dies" (Equus), "KNO Productions", "CH Sky Watch Bio" (Kentucky Horse Park), and "A Celebration of History ..." (The Saddlehorse Report). The Wills Ranch is a page which had this show for sale on VHS and DVD, which is relevant but not an independent source per WP:VENDOR (the Wills Ranch was owned by the show's producer Betty Wills). That leaves only an article from The American Saddlebred whose first page is used as an image in this article, a newspaper article not available without a newspapers.com account, and an article from "Horse Show Magazine" not available online. It's possible that the sources I can't access make a clear case for notability, and I don't want to judge the subject non-notable without being able to view the offline sources, but so far I'm not enthusiastic. --Metropolitan90(talk) 03:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the sources listed are required to verify the information provided. That is different from notability. We can discuss if those sources establish note ability, but they should not be removed, as they are there for other reasons. Montanabw(talk) 18:17, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
An additional source [1] (The Horse) has since been added to the article, but I don't see how it could be relevant. (The first part of the article is viewable free online, the rest of it requires registration.) This new source is a list of awards for horse-related media given for the year 1999. However, the show under discussion aired in 1993 and won its award for that year.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Metropolitan90 (talk • contribs) 15:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Horse is one of the most respected magazines in the field. The login is free, so the source isnot paywalled, and it is an acceptable, reliable source. Montanabw(talk) 17:38, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Even if it were from the correct year and actually given to the show, I'm not sure how notable an award by a non-TV award organization is. Gonnym (talk) 15:08, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In some respects, it would make it more notable, acknowledging the contributions made to the particular industry in question. What establishes note ability for me is that the award wasn’t merely for the saddlebred industry, it was for the horse industry as a whole.Montanabw(talk) 17:34, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It really isn't. If you'll go to almost any GA and above film or television article you'll see that there are either no or almost no awards listed from non-notable sources nor are there are awards listed from awards without an article. I don't see a The Horse (magazine) article, is it named something else and I'm just missing it? Gonnym (talk) 18:07, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I’m guessing it was probably noted in American Association of Equine Practitioners, which was deleted in 2013, Probably because it was one of those “press release copy and paste” articles. I’ll go find a link and post it here.Montanabw(talk) 18:22, 25 October 2021 (UTC) here you go, notes Equus magazine and The HorseMontanabw(talk) 18:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't ask for a website link, I asked for an article on en.wiki that shows that the magazine is notable and that the award it hands out is notable. Even film awards and organization need to show notability. Look at the history of Template:American film critics associations and see the AfDs of those deleted. Gonnym (talk) 18:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I just added this to the William Shatner filmography. Surely most everything he's touched is notable? Every single individual Star Trek episode ever produced is notable as a standalone article, as far as I know. – wbm1058 (talk) 18:42, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm very surprised to see an WP:INHERITED argument from an admin. Not every TV show is notable, not every show that a "famous" person was in is notable and not every Star Trek episode ever produced is automatically notable. See WP:TVSHOW on notability guidelines on TV, especially Generally, an individual radio or television program is likely to be notable if it airs on a network of radio or television stations (either national or regional in scope), or on a cable television channel with a broad regional or national audience. It is far less likely to be notable if it airs in only one local media market. - this was aired regional channels, so the lowest possible exposure. The guideline continues with: In either case, however, the presence or absence of reliable sources is more definitive than the geographic range of the program's audience alone. For instance, a purely local talk radio program might be notable enough for inclusion if it played a solidly sourceable role in exposing a major political scandal, and a national television program might not be notable if it was cancelled too quickly to have garnered any media coverage. - where are the reliable sources for this TV series? Gonnym (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nature (TV program) is produced by WNET New York, but that doesn't mean it's only broadcast in the New York area. Nova (American TV program) is produced by WGBH-TV Boston, which also produces programming that airs nationally. Just because Memphis doesn't unofficially serve as one of three flagship stations of PBS doesn't mean it doesn't occasionally produce things that air beyond the Memphis region. Presumably at least all the Kentucky-based PBS channels carried this. I suppose this can be verified by researching historical TV listings. – wbm1058 (talk) 19:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It might have aired even all over the US (which seems unlikely), but that still doesn't change the fact that unless RS talk about it (and not in a TV guide kind of way of "A Celebration of Horses: The American Saddlebred 6PM Monday") then the show is not notable. The fact that it was meant to be a series and ended up with one episode and that the only one talking about is the horse organization says a lot. Gonnym (talk) 19:33, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I know this is OR on my part, but I know it was aired all over the US, because I saw it on my PBS affiliate during pledge week several years ago. While the celebration of horses series probably is worthy of a standalone article, this one got the publicity because it had Shatner. Montanabw(talk) 17:34, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, although I recognize that this is a borderline case and the page could do with some improvement. I've looked at the criteria at WP:NF and the draft Wikipedia:Notability (television), and I take particular note of something that was mentioned just above by the nom: that notability is likely if "it airs on a network of radio or television stations (either national or regional in scope)". In fact, according to the page, it had "four releases nationally on 56 PBS affiliates". That is not just regional exposure; for PBS, 56 affiliate markets are a lot (especially given that there are 50 states in the US). PBS is a major broadcast network, and this was widespread national broadcasting. Also, the show won an award, albeit from a specialty organization. As far as I can tell, that organization was independent of the show production, and so this establishes some independent recognition of the show's significance. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:34, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note: I watched this show on YouTube and found that William Shatner was not the host of this show. He is, however, the person most prominently featured in it and there is plenty of interview footage of him in the show. I removed the references to Shatner being the host from the article. --Metropolitan90(talk) 04:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I touched that up a bit, to clarify that he was the celebrity guest, as opposed to host. It was kind of an odd structure, as the narrator isn’t exactly the host, and Shatner was prominently featured, but whatever. Also, a must raise a concern that certain citations required for variability were being removed by the person who nominated this article, and so I am posting a link to my last revision which shows all citations, and thus if we are looking at that issue, this is an easy place to compare other versions. Montanabw(talk) 18:16, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Tryptofish. Miniapolis 02:04, 26 October 2021 (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.