Deletion of Nudity in The Simpsons Nomination 2

Comment: per nom. "Interesting" does not make something encyclopedic. |Wikipedia is not a collection of trivia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: The very reference'' given repeatedly as reason for deletion makes no mention that this should be deleted ().. I can also quote from Wikipedia's own Help:Contents|Help Contents, "Wikipedia has only a few limitations on what topics it covers. Recipes and how-to articles are generally not included, but just about everything else is. In which other encyclopedia do you find a list of sex positions, an article about nose picking or one about William Shatner's version of Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds? As long as an article is verifiable, informative and neutral, it has a pretty good chance of being acceptable (see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for some other common rules). We strive to collect the sum of human knowledge, some of which may be trivial, but nevertheless is part of our cultures and our histories. Wiki is not paper - we need not worry about space constraints.".. As such, I must continue to protest against the argument for deletion. I implore anybody to argue on these basis, not simply their opinions on the relevance. —The preceding Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned comment was added by
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Simpsons-cruft gallore! If you want to add this stuff, find your own webpage or a Simpsons-wiki. Wikipedia is |not a list of all things that have ever existed, or everything to ever grace the Simpson
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)