Deletion of Bride Has Massive Hair Wig Out 2

Comment: as bad faith nom. I am getting very tired of these efforts to delete things that a cabal of users wants to memory-hole from the culture. It was a notable viral marketing effort that I researched thoroughly when I created it precisely because I knew it would be irresistible bait for today's punk deletionists otherwise. Apparently they get even more pissed off when you actually produce something up to WP standards.So little will be added to it? How can you say that for sure? And if that's the case, we have no business having articles on individual episodes of TV shows ... and I think as much creative effort went into this as into any episode of ''The Sopranos''. At least that I was able to document. If I hadn't created this article the way I did when I did it, someone else would have and we would have had a crappy subpar article to clean up and source.A redirect is an intolerable compromise IMO ... it's about as meaty as Bus Uncle, Dog poop girl, Star Wars Kid and other Internet phenomena that we have separate articles on.I cannot see any real reason this is being nominated save an attempt to make what is notable reflect some editor's idea of what ''should'' be notable in his or her ideal world, aka , and thus deleting it would be inherently POV. I would like to delete Paris Hilton from reality too, but she's notable by any objective standard and unfortunately deleting the article on her would not change reality. At least not yet (when are we going to get ''that'' feature in MediaWiki
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)