Deletion of "Shakespeare day"

Comment: The article was nominated for deletion at such an early stage, because it was already clear that it was going nowhere. The only notable thing that could be the subject of an article (the campaign to have the day recognised as a holiday) was clearly not what the article was about, and the subsequent edits show that this was to be a single section amongst many. The single sentence that was written was simply untrue. There is no notable celebration of "Shakespeare Day", involving dressing up, or eating Elizabethan food. The sentence as written was at best talking about a single, local non-notable event, and at worst was invented as what ''might'' take place on a hypothetical public holiday. Wikipedia deals in fact and does not engage in |crystal ball gazing. The same sentence also made the classic error of all poorly researched articles about him, and stated that he was born on April 23rd. The simple fact is that his date of birth is not known. It is known that he was baptised on April 26th, and some people like to conjecture that he was born on the 23rd both because it ties in with St Georges day, and because it means that he died on his birthday, but such a dating is merely conjecture and artistic licence. You complain about the speed with which it was nominated. The article was nominated as soon as it became clear that there was no hope for its survival. In what way would it have been better to leave it for 24 hours? Had I done that you could have spent a day adding to an article that was still going to be deleted
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)