Is the downvote above because someone disagrees, or because the downvoter is just completely unaware of the nature of the sites being taken down?
Most of these sites are promo fluff for BBC TV shows. Some are cancelled, some are for news show with little more "content" than "This show next comes on --- on BBC -".
Most of these sites would be dismissed as "marketing" if the BBC were a for-profit company. Marketing for defunct products. The rest is material that's being legitimately archived elsewhere.
(OT: I didn't downvote you above; in fact, I can't, since you replied to my comment I think. However, note that many of us frequently accidentally downvote instead of upvote and can't undo it, especially on mobile touch-browsers if we're not zoomed-in enough for a big arrow)
