Deletion of Girlfriend (7th nomination)

Comment: Several people have argued here that the article itself is somehow "notable".  Could someone please explain what evidence there is to support that assertion?  Or why it's relevant?  The only question on the table is whether this article has any reasonable potential of expansion past a mere |definition
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:WINAD)

Comment: AfD is not clean-up, per fD - ''if an article can be improved through regular editing it is not a good candidate for AfD''. Yes the article needs work on the origins/etymology, different uses in different cultures and a notable usages section. Just because it is neglected doesn't mean it can't be greatly improved
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A)

Comment: User is pissed off his own articles got nominated so he's going on a  rampage
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT)

Comment: The article provides ample reliable and verifiable sources to demonstrate notability beyond a mere dictionary definition. The fact that another AfD is being created this article spits in the face of , established over four substantive AfD discussions in the past few years. The goal appears to be to ignore any consensus through repeated AfDs until the only acceptable result -- deletion -- is achieved. More deletionism run amok
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Consensus (WP:CONSENSUS)