Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/One Fine Day!

A few reservations expressed, but nobody is saying keep. Poetlister 16:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

One Fine Day!
1) As seen on the WP article and its discussion page, this is a six-part cable TV series shown on a station at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign as well as on YouTube and DailyMotion. General notability is therefore questionable. 2) The quotes are  unremarkable. - InvisibleSun 05:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 06:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. - InvisibleSun 05:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm going for Delete per nom but it is one of those "where do you draw the line" ones. As the internet grows as an entertainment media I guess views will need to change and my collection of books will become relics!  However, for me, now, this is non notable and (in a sense at least) unremarkable -- Herby  talk thyme 15:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Herby's reservations noted, but surely not notable by current standards.--Poetlister 17:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm inclined to think it is notable in principle, but I see no worthwhile quotes.--Cato 21:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless notability evidence from reliable sources provided. This is a student-produced show. Do we start allowing articles on student plays? Student essays? These days, it's easier than ever to create a TV show, especially if you can call on college resources. Its notability doesn't seem to have spread beyond the campus, the local (small) newspaper, and easily-promoted web videos. I've posted a request at w:Talk:One Fine Day! for something solid, rather than mere assertions not backed up by citations, but I'm not holding my breath. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. ~ UDScott 17:31, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm on the edge. Just a hair below the borderline on notability, and some of the quotes are cute. I suppose the page can be restored if the subject acheives greater notability, but delete for now. BD2412 T 01:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I think that the comments of Cato and BD2412 show how subjective this all is. Can we have some firm policies to base decisions on?--Yehudi 13:21, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Notability is our default essay (not quite a policy) on this subject, but it currently has an empty section on creative works. Its general elements of "Wikipedia article supports Wikiquote article", "frequently quoted by others", and "verifiable by citing reliable sources" confuse more than inform here. We usually consider the works themselves as the best source, taking care of the veriability issue. But a Wikipedia article is not a guarantee of notability, and the "quoted by others" probably should make it clear that the assertion should be backed up, as with all other assertions, by reliable sources. I usually take this to mean that borderline-notable material should be included only if the works have been discussed in non-local print media and/or websites that are considered reliable sources by Wikimedia standards (e.g., not blogs, not discussion boards, not user-uploaded sites like MySpace, Facebook, YouTube, Google Video, etc.). Thus my comments above. But we probably need to work on codifying these ideas, especially for creative works like this one that aren't practically subsumed into an author article. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 17:04, 2 November 2007 (UTC)