Deletion of Mama-san

Comment: I cannot AGF on this, these bunch of AFDs are disrupting a |point. Strongly disagree with the nomination, it is definitely notable of course, everything (sources, content, notability) are all present. That's all
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT)

Comment: Does not violate , does establish notability per , may need more references but does not violate , does not violate  or EO. Wikipedia should not be Bowdlerized
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:WINAD||WP:N||WP:V||WP:OR||WP:NEO)

Comment: as another of this nominator's attempts to bowdlerize Wikipedia.  Please see 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT)

Comment: per , of which I have not seen a clearer case. Bad faith nom. Article is encyclopaedic. Very well known term. Looking at the other articles being put up, it appears that
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)