Thanks for the advice. I am seriously attempting to focus, as you suggest, on establishing consensus in the discussion on the talk page. However, I have yet to see any formal reason as to why the section in question is not encyclopedic. Is the onus on me and other editors to prove the section is encyclopedic or on others to show why it is not ? I guess I will have to go read the guidelines on this and reckon we will not arrive at consensus (given people's statements thus far) and either I will be snowballed or this will go into an escalated dispute.