Deletion of List of fandom names

Comment: The nominator's arguments are undercut by their tone of disdain for the subject, and disrespect for the people participating in this discussion. "A ham sandwich could pass LISTN, LISTN is broken" is not a good reason to delete this article. If you have a problem with the policy, then you should try to get the policy amended. Use of the word "(x)cruft" usually means a barely-concealed  just below the surface, but "a list of the most obscure shit we can find" is saying the subtext out loud. Also, blowing off 210 sources as "mostly garbage" is a heavy lift; shrugging off good-quality sources when they're identified doesn't help. I get that the nominator really doesn't like this article. All I can do is offer support in this difficult time
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: meets  as has been discussed as a group/set ie. https://www.worldcat.org/title/fandom-identities-and-communities-in-a-mediated-world/oclc/1120332162?referer=br&ht=edition ''Fandom: identities and communities in a mediated world'', https://www.worldcat.org/title/sportista-female-fandom-in-the-united-states/oclc/815938665?referer=br&ht=edition ''Sportista: female fandom in the United States'' to name just a couple
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN)

Comment: I fail to see how this is a list of fandom names and not "a list of  names someone once referred to the fandom as". Outside of extremely well-known names like Trekkie, there are few fandoms with a clear and obvious name for their fans. For example, Stargate fandom is not called Gater. The current keep votes do not advance any convincing argument besides 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ITSIMPORTANT)