Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Beyond
and suggest a courteous withdrawal by the well-intended {{u|JamesBWatson|nominator}}.  Yes the article when https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beyond_Beyond&type=revision&diff=728957815&oldid=726328730 first taken notice of by him was |weak, but so what?  When |due diligence shows the topic (even a |non-English one) has |multiple sources available, inclusion criteria are met even if they're not in English or immediately used. I remind of  and . and have grateful thanks to {{u|Tokyogirl79}}, for her |simple improvements making notability quite clear
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 12:12, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:UGLY||WP:BEFORE||WP:NONENG||WP:GNG||WP:NEXIST||WP:HANDLE||WP:IMPROVE (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)