Deletion of Thinking Allowed (TV series)

Comment: Per : {{tq|If no reliable independent sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it.}} This is in agreement with the basic of notability as provided by |GNG: {{tq|If a topic has received {{strong||significant coverage}} in {{strong||reliable sources}} that are {{strong|ndependent sources|independent of the subject}}, it is {{strong|presumed}} to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list.}} In fact the source "Archetypal Psychology" appears to be nothing more that a contextomy and |advertisement. If a source includes some advertisement, as a means to allow the information to be presented, that is one thing, but if a source is used wherein the ultimate goal is the  advertisement, it is attempts to commercialize Wikipedia at worse and |synthesis at best. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not YouTube|YouTube just does not achieve any of the criteria as a source to advance notability. See: Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites#YouTube and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:STICKTOSOURCE||WP:GNG||WP:I||WP:NOTADVERTISEMENT||WP:SYNTHESIS||WP:RSPYT||WP:significant coverage||WP:reliable sources)

Comment: also a book, by the presenter. I'm finding sources about the book but not about the show. /"airing on national television" is about "likely to be notable", not "notable". I checked for newspaper sources, reviews, academic sources etc. Not finding anything. Recreation is possible if someone can find more than the single secondary source currently given
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NTV)