Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Master Shake (2nd nomination)
and continue improvements toward an independent article or a suitable merge resulting from a discussed compromise. With respects to TNN, I am not a "diehard inclusionist" and have !voted delete at many AfDs. The first AfD was nearly two years ago... and I am not in any way suggesting that the closure in 2007 was incorrect. But the world continues to turn... and it is |not too difficult a stretch me to believe that the continued coverage of ATHF since that first AfD might now provide sourcing that could allow the article to better meet the requirements of . With an understanding that consensus is not eternal, and that growth is the purpose of Wikipedia and not its bane, I do not think it unreasonable to allow the article to be improved so as to better the project as a whole
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 23:08, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:COMMONSENSE||WP:N (Wikipedia:What "Ignore all rules" means)