Deletion of Diary of an Unborn Child

Comment: With the citation of NEXIST and CONTN, what people are saying is, in effect, "Wow, this is so interesting that sources ''must'' exist." As pointed out by Doomslayer520, this is really nothing more than |"I Like It". Sources need to be ''about'' this, not just this itself repeated again and again. But at this point, this article does not meet the notability guidelines
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT)

Comment: I have added five refs recovered from archives, hidden comments, and the talk page. One of them is from 1973 by Michele DuVal Aiello, another in from of a graphic novel from 1978 by Jack Thomas Chick. As odd as it is, this is too interesting as a track record of a story to be deleted. Also, given the long history of "usage example" over so many decades indicates some encyclopedic relevance per . I think, with some research it should be possible to put the fragments together into one coherent story, but that's normal article improvement, not AfD, see also  and EXIST
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:CONTN||WP:NEXIST)

Comment: I voted to delete above and don't mind if the article is eventually kept, especially since some more sources have been found. However, all three keep votes above use "interesting" as a reason to keep the article, and that's not too far from the |"I Like It" argument that should be avoided in deletion discussions. I said it was "interesting" too, but what matters here is |notability
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT||WP:GNG)

Comment: This is an interesting story. An anonymous underground work that went the equivalent of "viral" in the 1980s among the pro-life movement. There is evidence that the item was often discussed within that movement, and also ironically within the pro-choice movement, but these were almost certainly internal discussions that did not make the leap into the mainstream media where |reliable and significant coverage could be achieved. The same is true of the song that used the tract. It's the equivalent of something going viral in the blogosphere today, with lots of bloggers throwing it at other bloggers while nobody in the outside world notices
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: per . The subject meets our general notability guidelines and therefore is worthy of inclusion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NEXIST)