Deletion of The Watch (TV series)

Comment: Even if it remains forever stuck in development hell, the substantial media coverage it has already received, as seen in the article's references, makes it pass 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: I reviewed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Kominas (2nd nomination)|this AfD filed by the nom yesterday, and found a blizzard of high quality, substantive sources (including the ''Boston Globe'', the ''Washington Post'', ''Rolling Stone'' magazine, the Associated Press and ''Newsweek''), demonstrating that the nom didn't make the slightest effort to source the article, as  requires he do before filing an AfD.  I checked his contribution history, and found to my shock that in the course of over '''five hundred''' edits he made over the last two days, he filed the astonishing number of '''51''' AfDs, some of them as little as three minutes apart.  This is absurd, and worth taking to AN/I, but in the meantime these AfDs ought to be pulled.As far as this one goes, |notability is not temporary.  Something doesn't have to have ever gotten off the ground to meet the GNG, as this subject plainly does
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:N)

Comment: There's enough coverage, and that's what matters. Being released is not an actual criteria in the 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)