Deletion of List of fictional counties (4th nomination)

Comment: For the same reasons listed in the last three nominations.  Another vexatious repeat nomination contrary to  as no valid reasons to delete are provided.  ot paper  reserve
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DELAFD||WP:N||WP:P)

Comment: Another vexatious repeat nomination contrary to  as no valid reasons to delete are provided.  If the list is short, then this is not a problem – if it were long, the nominator would be complaining about that too.  The complaints that it is minor and overlistification are not policy-based and so are just forms of  contrary to .  This dislike seems to be an Anglo-American bias as counties are more significant in national culture in the UK, as compared with the US.  Borsetshire and Thomas Hardy's Wessex are quite notable in the UK and the list is a reasonable index of such per  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DELAFD||WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:NPOV||WP:LISTPURPS||WP:CLN)

Comment: this nomination being made after three unsuccessful AfDs aside, I don't see how this fails . I see twenty-two sources, which look legitimate to me -- I don't see anything wrong with them, and nobody else has tried to challenge their reliability. The article could definitely stand to be cleaned up -- this should be done -- but I don't see this as an inherently absurd or disjunct subject for a list
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NLIST)

Comment: as completely fails . I've done a brief  and cannot find any sources discussing this subject as a whole (this alone should be enough to convince editors to delete). The article as it stands is the result of /. Just to go through some of the sources in the lede
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN||WP:BEFORE||WP:SYNTH||WP:ORIGINAL)

Comment: per Vladimir. Between the sources that don't mention the subject at all (!), the passing mentions, and the unreliable sources I think it's pretty clear that this doesn't pass 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN)

Comment: I can see a lot of ‘keep’ votes are relying on  (even though last time reached no consensus). Would be interested to see some engagement on the topic and relevant sources
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:LASTTIME)

Comment: The sources in the article seem to fail to meet . One of the sources in the lead doesn't even seem to mention county within its text. Otherwise, it's just an indiscriminate list that, if reduced to blue links, really doesn't even need to exist
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN)