Deletion of @world record egg

Comment: per . Having it listed at List of most-liked Instagram posts is sufficient until lasting notability is established
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: the egg has accrued significant coverage in a large number of reliable sources. Will normally  (which is not a fleshed-out policy but rather part of ) could be used to discount an article's notability, the fact the egg post is the most liked post in the history of the internet is a clear claim to significance
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:NOT)

Comment: The inclusion test for Wikipedia content is not just whether it's on the pop culture radar today — to warrant a Wikipedia article, what would have to be shown is a substantive reason why this would pass the |ten-year test for ''enduring'' significance. That is, the question that needs to be answered, to make this notable enough for its own article, is why will people still care about it in 2029? Wikipedia's supposed to be about stuff that ''matters
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:10YT)

Comment: per {{u|SamHolt6}}.  This may be influenced by the fact that |I like it, but I say |let's not rush to delete it because it's already starting to gain attention from non-newsy sources like http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/news/2019/1/egg-photo-breaks-kylie-jenners-record-for-most-liked-image-on-instagram-554801 Guinness World Records
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT||WP:RAPID)

Comment: passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: for now per . I checked Google, and news articles are still being published about the egg. These articles cover a lot of different aspects of the egg picture and its online fame (not just the fact that its the most liked Instagram post). This could just be a flash in the pan, but there is also currently evidence to suggest it may have some lasting impact. I think its best to wait a few months to make a determination of the egg's lasting significance
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:RAPID)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: and revisit in a few months. Meets . Not sure what type of :crystal ball some for deletion are using herein to predict that this will have no enduring notability. Where can I get one
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per nom. This is exactly  where a a bunch of media sources always cover recent internet trends of no lasting impact. Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion, especially in the present era of overhyped internet phenomena
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: Nearly A Baker's dozen (speaking of eggs, see Egg carton|egg crate)  established that  is met.  That it is an Internet meme, which I don't care about, does not make it so devoid of worth that it should be deleted
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG)