Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia in culture (2nd nomination)
First of all, there's no fundamental problem with trivia. The problem is poorly sourced trivia, and this is well-sourced. Second, I can easily give examples of articles which are not currently cited in Wikipedia in culture that are secondary, reliable sources that discuss precisely this. For example, here is http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2232893820071022?sp=true Reuter's article. Other relevant articles include http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-ca-webscout30sep30,0,344107.story which discusses how Wikipedia covers pop culture extensively. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/04/wikipedia_popular_among_educated_and_wealthy/ this one shows the demographics of people who read Wikipedia. All of these could easily be used in the article proper. Moreover,  is a style guide, it in no way says we can't have articles that discuss Wikipedia. What it prohibits are things like on the Siegenthaler page saying and "this page was vandalized" as opposed to "Siegenthaler's Wikipedia page was vandalized." The original research claim holds no water since the mentions in question are mainly explicit mentions of the word "Wikipedia" and thus require no synthesis (unlike many trivia lists where one needs to get a joke or reference
— User:JoshuaZ, 20:58, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:ASR (Wikipedia:Manual of Style)