Deletion of Browncoat (2nd nomination)

Comment: Then possibly merge to Firefly (TV_series)#Fandom. The nomination appears to have the error of being based upon the state of the article rather than the ''availability'' of sources. Per , |topic notability is about the ''availability'' of |significant coverage in reliable sources, and not based upon whether or not sources are present in articles. The sources cited above by user:Jclemens strongly suggests topic notability, and the information should be |PRESERVED rather than blanket-deleted
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NRVE||WP:N||WP:GNG||WP:PRESERVE)

Comment: This is obviously a |spinoff from the main article Firefly (TV series).  If we wanted to consolidate this material then merger would be the way to go, per , and the nomination itself talks of merger.  AFD is therefore inappropriate.  Note also , "''It can be |disruptive to repeatedly nominate a page in the hopes of getting a different outcome
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:SPINOFF||WP:PRESERVE||WP:DELAFD||WP:BLOCK)

Comment: Not a dictdef. Maybe the lead should be changed so we Use–mention distinction|use the word rather than mention it: "A Browncoat is a Firefly fan" rather than "'Browncoat' is a word which refers to a Firefly fan". Anyway, I think there's enough significant coverage in reliable sources to support an article on Firefly fandom. Meets . The article needs work, but that's no reason to delete it. Maybe content should be merged ''from'' Firefly (TV_series)#Fandom to here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Needs expansion and overhaul. "is a term with two meanings" is a poor opening, as the in-universe use is never going to be a standalone article, but there's plenty of coverage in  of Firefly fandom to support its own article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: to Firefly (TV_series)#Fandom. So, "Browncoat" is simply a synonym for "''Firefly'' fan", and what the fans did can be summarized neatly in the main article. The in-universe term doesn't help here either; it doesn't matter in the real world. Not enough for a stand-alone article per . &ndash
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Summary style (WP:AVOIDSPLIT)