Deletion of King Kong defence

Comment: I believe that we should keep this article for now, as per  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Potential, not just current state (WP:PNJCS||WP:TIND)

Comment: Articles should not be created speculatively; Wikipedia should reflect reality, not try to influence it.  The article subject is '''not yet''' notable in its own right.  It ''is'' noteworthy enough to merit a mention in The Pirate Bay Trial article, which would make this the perfect candidate for merging and redirection.  I am surprised that this has not happened yet.  Wikipedia is |not 4chan or some other such place made for creating memes and running wild with them.  Wikipedia should accurately reflect the current reality from a neutral point of view, not be a battleground for ten thousand ideas.  --Special:Contributions/193.11.177.87|193.11.177.87
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Something I find funny/interesting: Deletion discussions have never been for deciding on a merge. In fact a Merge consensus defaults to a close as Keep. Merges can be performed at any time with no AfD (though they do require a discussion if controversial). Unless I'm mistaken, there's actually no one here in favor of a straight delete -- everyone either wants a Keep or a Merge -- I think that may even include the nominator. So really, this AfD should be closed as Keep per , since that's what '''everyone''' wants. Then we can have an RfC or something to determine whether or not the merge should happen. I just thought that was funny and interesting. Teehee. PS. In all seriousness, shifting to some sort of discussion probably would be the most productive thing to do at this point, rather than sit here and keep watching people cast xeroxed one-line votes from further up the page
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)