Talk:Break a Leg (sitcom)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on February 5, 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

I am currently working on the Break a Leg (the sitcom) page to get it up to Wikipedia standards. Please give me and other users at least a few more days to Wiki-fy the entry.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jargonovsky (talk • contribs)

Wikification isn't the issue. Notability and verifiability are. What reliable sources have reported on the sitcom? Where has it gotten reviews or other media coverage? In absence of that, the show isn't notable. —C.Fred (talk) 04:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The show has been mentioned in the LA Times, has an article in the Wall Street Journal and a write-up in the Huffington Post -- shouldn't that be enough? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jargonovsky (talk • contribs)

Ultimately, and I hate to be a spoil sport, because I love the show, does it really need an encyclopedic entry at this point? -Ntay 12:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

There are a hell of a lot of articles on wikipedia that lack notability. There a dozens of video game articles about japanese releases that are unsourced or where the sources are ONLY blogs and other bullshit that is not considered a good source for Wikipedia. The editors around here let it slide with technology related stubs and shit like that. Wikipedia is a great resource, but in the end, Editors who continually close articles "lacking notability" simply because they think there shouldnt be an article for every stupid little videoblog on the internet. Wikipedia editors are elitist assholes and even if Break a Leg ends up winning the TV guide internet show award or whatever its called, and gets written about on the front page of newsweek, it will "lack notability" 13:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.103.184.119 (talk)

I appreciate your zeal, but ultimately he's right. However, this show is notable in that it is one of many web shows which have been successful, and noted in the media. If you do see an article that you don't think is notable, discuss it, or nominate it for deletion. No need to get angry over anything, nobody's going to go ahead and delete something right off the bat :) -Ntay 23:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Break a Leg Banner.gif

Image:Break a Leg Banner.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)