Deletion of Pearl necklace (sexuality) (3rd nomination)

Comment: There are sufficient references for notability and although the border between dictionary definitions and encyclopedic articles may be fuzzy at times, this one seems to be sufficiently on the encyclopedic side to merit keeping. The argument to delete based on potential trivia magnetism is not policy based and should have absolutely no bearing on the close. Frankly, I think an appropriate amount of popular culture references enhances the value of an article, places the subject in a cultural context, and is a necessary and important service to our readers. I agree that the article does need work, but we fix problems with articles (other than intrinsic non-notability) by improvement, rather than deletion, per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: W're |not censored, and the act is certainly a notable one. And a |trout to the nom for urging us to "do the right thing
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTCENSORED||WP:TROUT)