Deletion of Bang Bus

Comment: It sounds like the nominator does not like the site which is the subject of the article. "IDONTLIKEIT" is not a basis  for deleting an article, if it has evidence of |notability. Nor is "IFYOUKEEPTHISIWILLCREATEANOTHERARTICLE." The article cites references such as a 2004 Miami New Times article which  calls it a "porn giant" and says it "often gets credit for being groundbreakers in the world of Internet amateur porn." There is a ref to a CommonDreams story with significant coverage. One ref is a story by TV channel 10, WPLG. The site won several awards from  "Adult Video News" per the refs cited. These seems sufficient to make a notability argument. There are a couple of dead link refs in addition which should be fixed to see what they offer
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Satisfies  and  with industry award wins. The GNews hit demonstrate notability according to the general guidelines. Wikipedia is not censored. We have articles on misogyny and misogynistic people. We can have one on a "misogynistic" website
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB||WP:NF)

Comment: Sufficient coverage in independent |reliable sources to demonstrate the |general notability of this particular site. Ultimately, this discussion has to be about this site, and not |whether similar websites do or don't have Wikipedia articles. Bang Bus has been covered enough (and yes, to a great extent, for some controversies involving it) that it is notable enough for an article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:OTHERSTUFF)

Comment: Bad faith nomination. Nom has admitted in comments that the site is notable, and misrepresented sources. |Pointy nomination based solely on noms dislike for subject
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT)