Deletion of Popular beat combo (2nd nomination)

Comment: The renomination is vexatious per , "''It can be disruptive to repeatedly nominate a page in the hope of getting a different outcome.''"  It is counterproductive to create multiple AfD pages to try to remove an innocuous page of this sort -- this adds to the clutter rather than reducing it.  As for the supposed case against, it's quite false.  It's clear that the late Marcel Berlins put some effort in researching this and this is well-documented and sourced.  Policies which mandate that we retain this include ; ; ; 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DELAFD||WP:ATD||WP:CENSOR||WP:NOTPAPER||WP:PRESERVE)

Comment: I think this just scrapes through notability, per , namely: {{tq|"such articles must go beyond what would be found in a dictionary entry... and include information on the social or historical significance of the term."}} Whilst one could linkspam the page with examples of this terms in use, there are just enough enough sources https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=sJJYOWArCj0C&pg=PA315 like this one to demonstrate that this ironic term is of note and of social significance (and us Brits are rather good at our irony). Being an avid Have I Got News For You watcher (who has heard the term used to mock well-educated Private Eye magazine editor and panellist, Ian Hislop for being culturally_out-of-touch), I didn't think it acceptable to add https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Characters/HaveIGotNewsForYou this source for verification as, sadly, it links to a user-edited site. &nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:WORDISSUBJECT)

Comment: An anecdote mentioned in passing in a handful of sources (even the reliable ones, which is not true for all the cited sources - forums, blog crap) does not meet 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)