Deletion of Pinky (dolphin)

Comment: Per . Wikipedia does not exist to promote tourism
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: I would encourage people to take a closer look at this subject before deciding to support deletion. While an article about a dolphin in the United States doesn't sound like it would meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines at first, the subject of this article isn't your average dolphin. This dolphin has been the subject of significant coverage in at least two reliable secondary sources: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/4927224/Pink-dolphin-appears-in-US-lake.html The Daily Telegraph and http://www.news.com.au/travel/story/0,28318,25165588-5014090,00.html News.com.au. Reading these articles, I've gleaned two things establishing the subject as highly unusual: (1) the animal is believed to be the only pink dolphin in the world and (2) the dolphin has become a tourist attraction. I think these two things help establish the subject as one of the select few dolphins notable enough for their own articles, together with the fact that the subject meets the |general notability guideline, as explained above. As for the  argument presented by Jujutacular, I firmly disagree.  states: "News coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, but not all events warrant an encyclopedia article of their own. Routine news coverage of such things as announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism are not sufficient basis for an article. Even when an event is notable, individuals involved in it may not be. Unless news coverage of an individual goes beyond the context of a single event, our coverage of that individual should be limited to the article about that event, in proportion to their importance to the overall topic." I fail to see how ''this'' subject is disqualified from inclusion by that policy in any way
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NOTNEWS)