520:- but you will have to remove all the links to copyright-violating scans of ads and listings from various publications, and vastly improve the quality of the surviving citations, as well as purging content based on non-reliable sources. You also need to be able to tell us what happened to this obviously-failed experiment, and source that information as well. --
310:
470:
that you could find from that era), which is available to the free public (just Google it) doesn't fit as source. You continue to present your point of view from a decidedly subjective area with by saying to me previously, "This is information the layman in no way cares about." Who is this "layman" that you are referring too besides yourself?
236:
When it comes down to it, this is a completely non-notable article about a long-gone syndicated film package that any average viewer just thought was another film an independent television station was showing (and was shown as such in consumer TV listings without the article title's name being called
295:
isn't necessary. And wasn't exactly a "block" of programming like say, TGIF on ABC, Must See TV on NBC, Saturday morning cartoons, or SNICK on
Nickelodeon. And you can't just presume that any average viewer just thought of it as just another film on independent TV because that isn't the point of the
469:
I again must stress that seemingly (deliberately) overlook the fact that I provided reliable sources like newspaper articles such as the one from the New York Times. You simply focus on YouTube links and try to spin it by saying that
Broadcasting magazine (which is as reliable as an industry source
333:
tonight not be merited? A newspaper is technically, considered a reliable source isn't it? It clearly acknowledges, the existence of the MGM/UA Premiere
Network even if it doesn't go into detail. And like I addressed with the New York Times article, it isn't the *only* newspaper reference of the
296:
article. Just because you see it like that, doesn't mean that that's the exact truth. Nor can you presume that no consumer really saw trade ads and by default, consider them as "unreliable". Plus, since you want to bring up how there are aren't any notable articles, well, for once thing, the
431:
What's the point in deleting the list of stations that were affiliated with the MGM/UA Premiere
Network if your intent is ultimately to have the entire article deleted? You can't have it both ways if you want to prove a point. I once again, stress that it was technically a TV network, not a
378:
instead of at random and without any branding or umbrella title to hold on to? Keep in mind that the whole point of the
Premiere Network, was for MGM to have their films air on commercial, broadcast television for the very first time. Hence why it was called the
610:
applies. There are sources already documented that demonstrate significant coverage in reliable sources. That those sources make it clear that this was not "really" a network as NBC, CBS, and ABC were at the time of its launch is not an issue of notability.
241:-violating clips of promos, trade ads no consumer really saw in everyday life mixed in with some 'tonight on (TV station)' ads in newspapers, random things on eBay and 'I remember this' forum posts, and otherwise cherry-picked
205:
565:
291:
any different that a list of stations that carries ABC, CBS, Fox, or NBC? I again, stress that it was technically, a network, so you can't just say that a list of stations that are affiliated with a
436:
you could say, is a programming block for
Cartoon Network, but is marketed as a separate network for ratings purposes, but that's another subject for another time. In the article concerning the
374:
If any average viewer just thought that the MGM/UA Premiere
Network was another film an independent television station was showing, then why exactly was it promoted as airing under the
444:. The service was expected to broadcast 24 movies in double-runs once a month for two years. MGM received 10½ minutes of advertising time within a two-hour movie telecast, while its
199:
166:
410:
was aired as part of the package alongside decidedly "lesser" MGM titles. If that doesn't make it "notable" enough then I don't know what else is, to be honest with you.
498:
448:
would retain 11½ minutes. 100 television stations were signed as affiliates by
October 1984, with the planned launch pushed back and set for November 10 of that year."
139:
134:
113:
143:
98:
348:
Let's put it this way, if I used a newspaper article instead of a YouTube link as a source in regards to what TV stations carried the
Premiere Network
126:
315:. You clearly view things from the perspective that since you never heard of it and it's "old", then it shouldn't be an article on Knowledge.
220:
187:
356:, which acknowledges WPIX in New York, KTLA in Los Angeles, and WGN in Chicago, would you still think that a list of stations on the
618:
93:
86:
17:
181:
130:
621:
597:
574:
556:
532:
509:
479:
457:
419:
392:
369:
343:
324:
273:
68:
177:
107:
103:
584:
541:
353:
300:
638:
437:
283:
227:
40:
281:
Bare in mind, that the MGM/UA Premiere
Network, was technically, an ad hoc television network. The article for
304:
122:
74:
634:
570:
552:
475:
453:
415:
401:
388:
365:
339:
320:
36:
193:
471:
449:
411:
384:
361:
335:
316:
607:
527:
242:
615:
264:
213:
502:
398:
238:
237:
out). Sourcing is limited to 'film is on TV station tonight' "what's on TV tonight" listings,
82:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
633:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
521:
63:
612:
464:
440:, the section on the Premiere Network said that "it signed affiliation agreements with
426:
297:
252:
246:
594:
160:
349:
330:
404:
from 1989, also became the subject of controversy when the 1983 box office hit
433:
303:
about it back in 1984. It was also written about in great detail in the books
53:
406:
245:
reaches. I already removed a list of stations that aired the films per
52:(although there is a consensus that the article still needs work). –
287:
even list it as such. How is a list of stations that carried the
629:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
587:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
566:
list of United States of America-related deletion discussions
544:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
156:
152:
148:
212:
432:
programming block like Must See TV, SNICK, or TGIF.
593:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
550:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
641:). No further edits should be made to this page.
564:Note: This discussion has been included in the
497:Note: This discussion has been included in the
306:Movies at Home: How Hollywood Came to Television
499:list of Television-related deletion discussions
312:Hollywood and Broadcasting: From Radio to Cable
226:
8:
114:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
397:The Premiere Network, as explained in this
563:
496:
442:eight television stations in large markets
7:
350:such as this in Minneapolis/St. Paul
24:
99:Introduction to deletion process
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
533:23:02, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
510:07:33, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
480:10:28, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
458:09:17, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
420:04:23, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
393:04:09, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
370:04:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
344:03:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
325:03:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
274:03:20, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
1:
622:07:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
598:15:29, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
331:"this film is on TV station"
329:Why should sources that has
69:22:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
575:14:51, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
557:14:49, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
89:(AfD)? Read these primers!
658:
360:, shouldn't be featured!?
438:Fourth television network
284:Fourth television network
631:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
376:MGM/UA Premiere Network
123:MGM/UA Premiere Network
75:MGM/UA Premiere Network
87:Articles for deletion
334:Premiere Network.
600:
577:
559:
512:
399:Los Angeles Times
271:
104:Guide to deletion
94:How to contribute
649:
592:
590:
588:
573:
555:
549:
547:
545:
530:
524:
507:
468:
430:
272:
267:
261:
260:
255:
231:
230:
216:
164:
146:
84:
66:
61:
34:
657:
656:
652:
651:
650:
648:
647:
646:
645:
639:deletion review
601:
583:
581:
569:
560:
551:
540:
538:
528:
522:
503:
462:
424:
265:
258:
253:
250:
173:
137:
121:
118:
81:
78:
64:
54:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
655:
653:
644:
643:
625:
624:
591:
580:
579:
578:
548:
537:
536:
535:
514:
513:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
488:
487:
486:
485:
484:
483:
482:
460:
346:
298:New York Times
234:
233:
170:
117:
116:
111:
101:
96:
79:
77:
72:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
654:
642:
640:
636:
632:
627:
626:
623:
620:
617:
614:
609:
608:WP:NOTCLEANUP
606:
603:
602:
599:
596:
589:
586:
576:
572:
571:North America
567:
562:
561:
558:
554:
553:North America
546:
543:
534:
531:
525:
519:
516:
515:
511:
508:
506:
500:
495:
494:
481:
477:
473:
466:
461:
459:
455:
451:
447:
443:
439:
435:
428:
423:
422:
421:
417:
413:
409:
408:
403:
400:
396:
395:
394:
390:
386:
382:
377:
373:
372:
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
351:
347:
345:
341:
337:
332:
328:
327:
326:
322:
318:
314:
313:
308:
307:
302:
299:
294:
290:
286:
285:
280:
279:
278:
277:
276:
275:
270:
268:
257:
256:
248:
244:
243:WP:ITSNOTABLE
240:
229:
225:
222:
219:
215:
211:
207:
204:
201:
198:
195:
192:
189:
186:
183:
179:
176:
175:Find sources:
171:
168:
162:
158:
154:
150:
145:
141:
136:
132:
128:
124:
120:
119:
115:
112:
109:
105:
102:
100:
97:
95:
92:
91:
90:
88:
83:
76:
73:
71:
70:
67:
62:
60:
59:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
630:
628:
604:
582:
539:
517:
505:CAPTAIN RAJU
504:
445:
441:
405:
380:
375:
357:
311:
305:
292:
288:
282:
262:
251:
235:
223:
217:
209:
202:
196:
190:
184:
174:
80:
57:
55:
49:
47:
31:
28:
523:Orange Mike
200:free images
472:BornonJune
450:BornonJune
434:Adult Swim
412:BornonJune
385:BornonJune
362:BornonJune
336:BornonJune
317:BornonJune
239:WP:YOUTUBE
635:talk page
619:(contrib)
613:Eggishorn
518:weak keep
465:Mrschimpf
427:Mrschimpf
383:Network.
37:talk page
637:or in a
585:Relisted
542:Relisted
446:stations
407:Wargames
381:Premiere
167:View log
108:glossary
39:or in a
595:Spartaz
402:article
358:Network
293:network
289:NETWORK
266:chatter
247:WP:ELNO
206:WP refs
194:scholar
140:protect
135:history
85:New to
616:(talk)
178:Google
144:delete
301:wrote
221:JSTOR
182:books
161:views
153:watch
149:links
16:<
605:Keep
529:Talk
476:talk
454:talk
416:talk
389:talk
366:talk
354:this
340:talk
321:talk
309:and
254:Nate
214:FENS
188:news
157:logs
131:talk
127:edit
56:brad
50:keep
352:or
228:TWL
165:– (
568:.
526:|
501:.
478:)
456:)
418:)
391:)
368:)
342:)
323:)
249:.
208:)
159:|
155:|
151:|
147:|
142:|
138:|
133:|
129:|
65:🍁
474:(
467::
463:@
452:(
429::
425:@
414:(
387:(
364:(
338:(
319:(
269:)
263:(
259:•
232:)
224:·
218:·
210:·
203:·
197:·
191:·
185:·
180:(
172:(
169:)
163:)
125:(
110:)
106:(
58:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.