Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/24 Hour Propane People (2nd nomination)


 * 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 closed due to Arbitration Committee injunction. Non-admin closure. Serpent&#39;s Choice (talk) 18:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

24 Hour Propane People
AfDs for this article: 
 * (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable King Of The Hill episode articles consisting of plot summaries, infoboxes, and quote sections. No secondary sources demonstrate notability outside the show itself. This is relisted; previous nomination included 40 episodes (after 40 contested prods), and was closed as "no consensus" solely because closing editor considered the nomination too unwieldy in size to form a consensus, despite Keep votes consisting of bad faith accusations against the nominator and unsubstantiated claims of notability, and despite a similar nomination closing as Delete all.

There is no content to merge, as the existing episode list already contains brief plot summaries appropriate to a list. Redirecting is unnecessary since none of these article titles are likely search terms. / edg ☺ ☭ 18:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep A violation of Halt to activities. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep in deference to the on-going arbitration case. Wait until that's decided before doing something like this. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 11:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, I agree 100% with the deletion rationale, but there is an injunction. Hopefully the ArbCom will deal with this promptly and we can get back to business as usual.  Lankiveil (complaints 12:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC).
 * Speedy Keep. Due to ArbCom's injunction that articles on episodes must not be deleted, it's the only way I can vote. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 12:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * On that case, I guess I should withdraw this nomination. It's a good thing no new episode stubs are being created. / edg ☺ ☭ 15:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Take the original to DRV. A new discussion is only going to cause an uproar due to the injunction, but the discussion that we had before established a clear consensus anyway.  Just take the last nom to WP:DRV.  ➪ Hi DrNick ! 16:01, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.