- 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. v/r - TP 00:52, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Suckers (CSI) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unreferenced, fails to summarise the plot, instead the article is a full synopsis of the episode. —James (Talk • Contribs) • 9:57am • 23:57, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:21, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - non-notable episode, no reliable sources indicate notability independent of the series. Harley Hudson (talk) 19:42, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:19, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Unless there is some impact out side of the plot line, there is no reason to keep this article. This goes with all the other CSI episodes and probably any other show.Curb Chain (talk) 13:10, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per de-facto organization of content used for every season starting with Season 4. Any removal of this article should only be done as part of a general plan as to the series' coverage in general.--Milowent • talkblp-r 15:52, 14 June 2011 (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.