Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exploding animal (4th nomination)
The reference to  is badly wrong: it says ''Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources'' but here there is no original conclusion here. There is no original research.  and  would be appropriate if we were discussing articles of each episode, but they do not refer to article content. In fact it was exactly for these reasons that several articles were merged into this one. Actually, unifying sources content under a common denominator because Wikipedians say so is exactly our job in making an encyclopedia; that the nom thinks it's "garbage" only means he |doesn't like it, but well, this has never been a good reason to delete stuff. It could be renamed as List of exploding animals however, but this is an editorial decision
— User:Cyclopia, 02:24, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:SYNTH||WP:NOTNEWS||WP:SBST||WP:IDONTLIKEIT (Wikipedia:No original research)