Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of terms of endearment (3rd nomination)
as the article has continued to be improved since the "Keep" of the 1st AfD and the "no consensus" of the 2nd AfD. I feel that the improvements to the article in keeping with guideline and policy merit a definite keep. That aside, and in considering the very recent 2nd AfD, it is cogent to quote : "If an article is frivolously nominated (or renominated) for deletion, then editors are justified in opposing the renomination. Frivolous renominations may constitute Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point|disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point, especially when there was a consensus to keep it in the past, or when only a short time has elapsed since the last nomination
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 20:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NOTAGAIN (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)