Deletion of GhostSingles.com

Comment: as {{U|Gargleafg}}, this topic has been covered in .  The question is, does this topic measure up to ?   has a section for nominator -- 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:ATA||WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: I cleaned up some minor typos and added another source of coverage.  It just barely meets my threshold for , although I would like to see more about the founder and the history of the site, as well as more current info showing that it has staying power and recurring relevance. Otherwise, the  argument gets stronger.  Right now, I see  applying more to one time news events - not web sites that are ongoing and continuing to exist. The lask of history and more current coverage (beyond what is highlighted above) is the only thing that keeps me from giving this a regular keep vote. I read the essay and also agree that the NORAD Santa example is not the best comparison, but my overarching guideline is , regardless of if it's satirical subject matter or not. I also noticed that the creator has not weighed in, probably because he doesn't know he can vote. I'm not sure how much weight that would have for the closer, regardless.  Of interesting note - the article creator appears to be a student studying English at Arkansas State University, and this was a course assignment. https://dashboard.wikiedu.org/courses/Arkansas_State_University/ENG3053_Digital_Writing_(Spring_2018) One way or the other, this will be a Wikipedia learning experience for him
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NEWSBRIEF||WP:NEWSBRIEF||WP:GNG)