`    The case for deletion of this article is grossly incorrect (read it here and here).  1. The case states that PotterCast never reached #1 on iTunes; this is incorrect. It reached #1, actually, faster than MuggleCast did, and the site posted a screenshot of such when it occurred (nevermind we fans saw it on our own iTunes as well).  2. ``Mugglecast occurs one a week; the next Pottercast is scheduled for Summer 2006`` - what? PotterCast has come out every week without fail since it debuted last August - even MuggleCast took two vacation weeks. Not only that, they have put out numerous extra editions, so that they produced something like 65 episodes in a year (see their archives page on PotterCast.com if you're interested) as opposed to MuggleCast, who produced far fewer. This is easily checkable and provable - someone saying otherwise led to this article's deletion? Couldn't someone look into it first? That's hardly fair.  3. On this page here, this conversation occurs:  ``Yes, the page has very little info, but it can be expanded into an article like the Mugglecast one. -Hoekenheef ``  ``My nomination has nothing to do with content. MuggleCast has notability as it gained a number one rating on iTunes podcast listings. PotterCast is not notable. WAvegetarian ``  ``Comment - Ah I misunderstood your stance. Seeing as that is the case of the matter I change my vote. -Hoekenheef ``  So, not only is his claim based in error, someone else has changed their vote based on such a claim. And even though PotterCast DID, in fact, reach #1 on the iTunes music store, since when is that the benchmark of notability? There are tons of notable podcasts who have done no such things, and I'm sure a search on Wikipedia would produce some of them. In addition, this comment:  ``In the Harry Potter pod world, there is MuggleCast and ``everyone else.``   - makes me sure the users here had an axe to grind. This is a wholly incorrect statement. PotterCast is a MUCH more notable podcast in that it actually brings content INTO the Potterverse; MuggleCast is simply discussion. PotterCast has brought on the editors of the Harry Potter books (Arthur Levine, Cheryl Klein), ALL the directors of the first four HP movies, Bonnie Wright, Matt Lewis, Jamie Waylett - countless other notables that bring news and info - and not just the hosts opinion - to the podcasts themselves. The news that has appeared solely on their podcast has been reported ON MuggleCast, and we're calling PotterCast insubstantial in comparison? They broke a worldwide story open by talking to M. Night Shyamalan about his statements regarding directing a Potter film - this is a show that is less notable than one that consists ENTIRELY of theory and discussion? MuggleCast has had one cast interview: Warwick Davis. Good as that interview was, it is absolutely nothing to the long history of polished and notable interviews PotterCast has presented.  They actually add objective news and information to the Potter world, AND they do all the theory and discussion so touted on MuggleCast. They also do song contests, impression contests, DVD commentaries...the levels of variation on PotterCast are huge. Yes, I am a fan of this show, but yes, I am completely appalled that Wikipedia has taken action based on who are claerly MuggleCast fans saying false things about PotterCast to make it seem less than it is. We have a whole article about MuggleCast - highlighting of all things, SPY ON SPARTZ, clearly a contribution to society as in we find out where Emerson Spartz is at any given minute - yet PotterCast's tremendous interviews and work get condensed to a line and relegated to simply part of The Leaky Cauldron's page.  MuggleCast has its own page. As such, PotterCast ABSOLUTELY deserves one. This should be expanded to at LEAST the length and quality of the MuggleCast one.   - 24, August, 2006 (UTC)`