Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Distinguished Artists
To be clear, this actually aired on TVOntario despite the article's failure to say that very clearly, so it would pass  if it could actually be |reliably sourced. But TV shows are not exempted from having to have any sources just because they're technically verifiable as having existed, and I share the nominator's lack of success in finding any new sources that would bolster its notability at all — even on a ProQuest search to locate contemporaneous press coverage that wouldn't Google because this show is 15 years old, literally all I was able to find was a bunch of its own press releases about itself, with no evidence of a -worthy volume of journalistic reportage. Yes, we used to have a bad habit of allowing TV shows to have articles as long as their existence was verifiable, while being lax on the sourcing piece — but given the amount of advertorial spam about local public access shows and paid-programming infomercials that left us to contend with, we've tightened up our rules over the past 15 years, and the quality and depth and range and volume of the ''sources'' is now much more clearly the controlling factor. Verification of existence is still necessary, obviously, but is no longer sufficient in and of itself
— User:Bearcat, 20:14, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:TVSHOW||WP:RS||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)