Deletion of The Great Stink (Gilmore Girls)

Comment: per past precedent of keeping GG episode articles. I have no idea how to get individual episode articles beyond the level of crap and/or stub, but previous discussions indicate it is possible. Subject passes  criteria (reviews, etc
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: per the reasoning of Extraordinary Machine and Hiding.  WP:NOT is policy.  The article violates that policy.  And there is no sign that there are any reliable, independent sources that we could use to add "real-world context and sourced analysis" to the article as required by WP:NOT.  No need to redirect (unlikely search term) or merge (what information is there to merge?).  Responding to folks above who cite "precedent" as a reason for keeping:  Wikipedia is not a court.  Each subject is treated individually, on its own merits, i.e. are there enough reliable sources independent of the subject to write an article.  Even  emphasizes that "This page is not policy."  If people find ''arguments'' made at past AfD's convincing and relevant to this AfD, then repeat those arguments.  But ''outcomes'' of past AfD's have nothing to do with this one.  Anyway, precedent is not uniform on episode articles, see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Merry_Fisticuffs_(Gilmore_Girls)|this (cited by Salad Days) or Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pieface_%28The_Buzz_on_Maggie_episode%29|this
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:AFDP)

Comment: for flagrant violation of , no ''Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines|valid'' reason to keep has been presented (note:  is not a valid reason to keep).  "Keep and cleanup" is not a valid recommendation - I believe you mean
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:ILIKEIT)

Comment: but simplify. AFD is supposed to be a place to discuss articles that due to their subject matter are believed inappropriate for Wikipedia; I think it's been pretty well established that articles on episodes of major TV series are appropriate given past AFDs and . Improving content is another matter
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:EPISODE)

Comment: to List of Gilmore Girls episodes per #Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information, which states "Wikipedia articles on works of fiction should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's achievements, impact or historical significance, '''not solely a summary of that work's plot'''. A plot summary may be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic." (Emphasis mine.) Fully agree with the "poorly written quasi-stream-of-consiousness drivel" assessment
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/French Twist (Gilmore Girls) and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:EPISODE)

Comment: current content as a copyright violation.  Plots themselves are copyrighted.  Pages which are mere plot summaries violate Wikipedia:fair use|fair use.  Redirect the page to the parent show per  until and unless someone finds enough independently verifiable information to support a stand-alone article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:EPISODE)