Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cinematic television (2nd nomination)
As |synthesis and |original research. This is an interesting one - the sole ''authoritative'' source for the term at this point (and at the time of the previous AFD) seems to be the Edinburgh International Film Festival, which created a 'strand' (a category?) for high-value, high-budget TV shows. However, a single source does not an industry term make. The rest of the web references are a mix of slightly RS and definitely non-RS sites, along with a few news mentions. I will note that I got exactly '''two''' hits in Google Books when searching for the precise term "cinematic television", which is not encouraging. We know what this term refers to, of course. That is not the issue. The problem is that, from an original research standpoint, the author(s) took the concept as promoted by the EIFF, did a Google search to find further mentions in a few news sites and blogs, and then added a list of TV shows that are known to have cost over $X to produce. ''Voilà'', now we have Wikipedia promoting the term, rather than documenting it. Show me a ''single'' authoritative, reliable source tied to research or the TV or film industry that treats this topic the same way as the article, that uses the same language and examples, and I'll reverse my !vote in a second. As this stands now, it's synthesis and OR, and so it belongs in a blog somewhere, not here
— User:FreeRangeFrog, 20:01, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:SYNTH||WP:OR (Wikipedia:No original research)