Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King Kong defence
commenting as an AFD regular, not one of the many people who have visited this page and seen the deletion notice).  Page clearly passes  with several third party references to well-known reliable sources.  The fact that most of them refer to the subject of the article in their headlines suggests their authors consider this an important topic.  While OTNEWS may apply, it will be easier to tell if it is relevant in, say, 3 months' time, when we can see whether or not thhere are ongoing references.  In the meantime, we should keep this informative, well-sourced article, because there's no real reason not to
— User:JulesH, 08:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:N||WP:NOTNEWS (Wikipedia:Notability)