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 delete. sourcing is a major concern that wasn't settled in the time span of the AFD Secretaccount 01:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YamakiriTC§01-15-2008 • 23:01:15 23:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As De-Prodder. YamakiriTC§01-17-2008 • 01:37:43
Comment I fixed this AfD discussion for you. Can you please provide a rationale? Never mind, done. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 23:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note Contested prod. Prod nominated by SarekOfVulcan with reason: "No assertion of notability, despite being tagged since October. Google searching brings up lots of Knights of Saint Michael, but very few that apply to this show." Procedural completion of AfD. Tevildo (talk) 23:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article needs improvement, but the subject qualifies as notable. Majoreditor (talk) 02:16, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Normally, a TV series is a no-brainer- there's no shortage of sources. But, these sources so far are either minor local interest stories, or the page that belongs to EWTN. This certainly does not look like one of EWTN's more significant series. Delete unless properly sourced with independent sources providing nontrivial coverage of the actual series. Friday(talk) 17:19, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (as prodder) per Friday.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 21:19, 16 January 2008 (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.