The result was no consensus. While there are clearly more numbers to delete, many of the delete arguments amount to little more than assertions of non-notability. The keep arguments on the other hand point to sources that have not been questioned, and give reasons why this episode is more than a run of the mill episode of the program. In light of this, there can be no consensus to delete. Mkativerata ( talk) 20:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Maybe I'm not looking in the right places, but I do not see why this episode is so special it deserves it's own article. Does not establish notability, so fails WP:N. If I'm wrong, and this is notable, I'll happily withdraw this. — Dæ dαlus Contribs 06:57, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
I would also like to note that the single source doesn't even appear to be reliable, and more of a 'gossip' site.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 06:59, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. While there are clearly more numbers to delete, many of the delete arguments amount to little more than assertions of non-notability. The keep arguments on the other hand point to sources that have not been questioned, and give reasons why this episode is more than a run of the mill episode of the program. In light of this, there can be no consensus to delete. Mkativerata ( talk) 20:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Maybe I'm not looking in the right places, but I do not see why this episode is so special it deserves it's own article. Does not establish notability, so fails WP:N. If I'm wrong, and this is notable, I'll happily withdraw this. — Dæ dαlus Contribs 06:57, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
I would also like to note that the single source doesn't even appear to be reliable, and more of a 'gossip' site.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 06:59, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply