Deletion of 50 Cutest Child Stars: All Grown Up

Comment: While the |ARS have certainly piled on the Keep !votes, none of the sources added to this article prove anything other than the fact that this show actually existed.  It's obvious that none of the ARS members actually examined any of the references that were added to the article, and just added their blind praise about how great the improvements to the article are.  If we actually look at all of the references, we find the following
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron (WP:ARS)

Comment: I'm not surprised that a TV special that has been rebroadcast in international markets has become the subject of some newspaper coverage, beyond just TV listings. I've read the ''Toronto Star'' article; it's substantial coverage. Along with the brief reviews in such other sources as the ''Daily Telegraph'' and ''The Observer'' (brief but non-trivial coverage can help support notability), that's not a ''lot'' of coverage but it's enough for our  guidelines. It's unfortunate that this discussion has perhaps become tainted by the dispute between Jclemens and SnottyWong
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Per , the topic needs significant coverage in reliable sources. The sources found have already been well analyzed by others so I will simply reiterate that the coverage for this special, mostly a few bare mentions. As such, the special is just not notable, even if it was interesting to watch
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: per snottywong. Despite sources existing which prove this program exists (tv guide type sources), there are no  which show this program meets the criteria of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:NOTE)