Deletion of List of warez groups (5th nomination)

Comment: Violation of {{mdash}} '''''Four (4)''''' previous AfDs all closed as '''Keep'''.The nominator '''did not use an edit summary''' while adding the {{tl|AfDM}} template to the article. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_warez_groups&diff=283326406&oldid=283326392 No edit summary was used when he revised the template to link to the '''5th nomination''' http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_warez_groups&diff=283326451&oldid=283326406 after he discovered this article had previously been nominated for VfD/AfD multiple times in the past.  explains this step explicitly. The edit history of the nominator's talk page shows he has been warned about this and his contribution history shows he has been on Wikipedia long enough to know better. is not a valid reason for an XfD nomination and  makes it quite clear AfD is not for cleanup.Wholesale removal of content instead of attempting to source it http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_warez_groups&diff=283605924&oldid=283326451 is not in keeping with .As noted in the original VfD discussion from 2005, this article was created explicitly for these warez groups where they did not have enough material to justify separate stub articles. Articles such as Operation Site Down show that this is non-trivial subject and that it is not something that is impossible to improve.For those interested in doing further research, these books are probably a good place to start
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT||WP:AFDHOWTO||WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:BEFORE||WP:PRESERVE)