Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blackout! (Ugly Betty)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep (WP:NACD) CTJF83 chat 21:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blackout! (Ugly Betty)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It's just a plot. It doesn't even summarise the plot. I tried to redirect to a list of episodes but I was reverted and there's nothing to suggest this is "too notable" to go in a list. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 15:29, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. —Polarpanda (talk) 15:35, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It is notable.[1] It needs a massive rewrite plus sourcing, but a WP:GA could be made out of it. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 16:21, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clicking on the link Peregrine Fisher has provided, I see many news stories about this episode. Dream Focus 13:12, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Seems like there is lots of past hoopla when it comes to articles on individual episodes of shows on Wikipedia. While I personally can't fathom why we have separate articles on every episode of this series, we do. Wikipedia:Television episodes appears to be a relevant policy (and seems to favor season by season summaries), but a 2008 arbitration ( Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Episodes_and_characters_2#Findings_of_fact ) states that "The body of precedent and convention regarding the matter under dispute (referencing: existence of articles regarding individual episodes and characters from television series) is unclear, with the major current guideline being applied inconsistently, and old historical precedent tending towards a contradictory viewpoint" -- apparently meaning that we have a slew of individual episode articles. As every episode has its own article right now, I can't see why we'd delete just this one.--Milowent (talk) 18:50, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable episode of notable show per the numerous sources and reviews. No case for deletion. Colonel Warden (talk) 17:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Why would this even be discussed? If you delete this one there are nearly a hundred others just like it.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 15:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - notable episode; nomination is a case to improve the article, not delete it. Rlendog (talk) 20:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.