Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/And that's a good thing
Since when is AfD for cleanup? The complaints are about the sources currently in the article. Has the nominator made any attempt been made to discuss this with the article creator? Or to find sources? He seems to have done neither. Absolute worst case this should be kicked back to draft space or userspace. Or there could be a merge/redirect to clickbait. Furthermore, the article creator has virtually no edits. Is it necessary to  with this trigger-happy AfD nom?{{parabr}}I don't believe GNG exactly applies here in any event. Articles about words and phrases are difficult to write and difficult to source in a way that provides the requisite two news articles we typically demand from run-of-the-mill subjects like biographies and events. It's unquestionable that this is a common clickbaity headline element about which there has been interest, just that separating the wheat from the chaff in doing source analysis is difficult. The author of this article should be commended for taking on such a difficult subject rather than suddenly face an AfD nomination. Special:Contributions/69.174.144.79|69.174.144.79
— [[User talk:69.174.144.79|talk]]), 00:37, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:BITE (Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers)