Deletion of Series of tubes (3rd nomination)

Comment: most notable in its own right. The subject eminently satisfies , it has received significant coverage from Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources|independent Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable Wikipedia:No original research#Primary, secondary and tertiary sources|secondary sources. See for example discussion in http://books.google.com/books?q=%22series+of+tubes%22+%22ted+stevens%22&btnG=Search+Books 51 books
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: there was a strong consensus as to its notability at the previous AfD two years ago, and |notability is not temporary. While some of the material is indeed covered in Ted Stevens, the separate article does provide substantial additional information which is sourced. Given the length of the Ted Stevens article (and clear "undue weight" issues) it's not appropriate to merge further information to the main article - hence, the continued existence of this article seems to be the best solution
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NTEMP)

Comment: per above - I can't say anything without just parroting.  , anybody
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)