Deletion of Limecat (2nd nomination)

Comment: How can you all use noteability as a justification for deletion of something you have all heard of? Unless there is some seriously better argument given here this article should be kept.  Albiet limecat is '''stupid''' but then so is ytmnd and a dozen other things that are notable.   wikipedia is |NOT a paper encyclopedia, and it really should include articles on anything that has verifiable and potentially useful information to know about it.  furthermore, just as wikipedia is not a crystal ball, neither is the deletion page, we do not know(although it seems quite obvious, that's not enough) that this stupid fad will fade away to total obscurity. The hamster dance has stayed quite some time, has it not(in terms of internet age).  Deletion of articles on Silly Things does not make articles about Serious Things any better
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: It fails  and it's not notable. My first time hearing of it was yesterday when I saw it referenced in a different deletion, and I was toying with the idea of nominating it myself. The article itself can hardly be said to be encyclopaedic content - it basically identifies the picture. I have to assume this is because there isn't anything else to be written about it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)