Deletion of Sadie Hawkins Day

Comment: A fictional element that took on life in the real world and has had enduring cultural significance; 80 years later, it is https://www.newspapers.com/image/613761345/?terms=%22sadie%2Bhawkins%2Bday%22 still https://www.newspapers.com/image/445732521/?terms=%22sadie%2Bhawkins%2Bday%22 being https://www.newspapers.com/image/666092053/?terms=%22sadie%2Bhawkins%2Bday%22 "celebrated". '''edited to add:''' I just took a look at the shape the article was in when it was nominated, and it was an unsourced and rather sad article. However, a proper  would have shown the notability. Good work by {{u|Toughpigs}} improving it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: as this is clearly notable per {{u|Toughpigs}}, as well as a simple  as stated by {{u|Schazjmd}}.  Just the news and books links provided for Google searches turn up a plethora of information from tabloids to local press to national pop culture (''People (magazine)|People'', ''Seventeen (American magazine)|Seventeen'') all the way up to respected publications such as ''The Atlantic'',  ''Time (magazine)|Time'', and ''The New York Times''.  I agree that a merge of some sort may not be a bad idea, but deciding the best spot to merge into doesn't need to hold up this AfD.  (I would argue they should come into this article, though
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: There is abundant significant coverage (just click on the links at the top of this page). Nominator clearly did not do 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)