Deletion of Whoo hoo!

Comment: First of all, nominator might want to be a little more careful with facts, as the article was only deleted twice. But details aside, the article as it stands now, does not even resemble the article that was deleted. As for nominator's reasons for deletion, I will go through them one be one. 1 - Notability: Nominator who is from South Africa might not be that familiar with American pop-culture to know that the advertising campaign is extremely popular and widespread here in the United States. However, despite cultural differences, nominator could have realized that this advertising campaign was notable, simply by checking the references in the article. Advertising campaigns rarely receive mainstream media coverage about their actual advertising campaigns (the reason is obvious - there's a conflict of interest). Nevertheless, this campaign has met the  requirement, and has received significant coverage in reliable sources. This is clearly established by the references in the article. If the reliable sources in the article are not enough, there are another http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=gqT&q=Wamu+whoo+hoo&btnG=Search 21,000 ghits that one can peruse. 2 - "Spammy": Again, nominator might be confused with the original reasons for speedy deletion. The article was was first deleted as spam because it mainly focused on the ad agency that created the ad, and not the actual ad. The article as it stands now, has no relation to the original article. 3 - "conflict of interest" - despite COI not being a basis for deletion, I will address it as well. I don't know the creator of the original article, but it is likely that there was some sort of COI. However, as stated earlier, the article that was previously created does not even resemble the current article. I hope nominator isn't accusing me (I have some 30k edits) of having a conflict of interest
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)