We believe that some questions need to be deleted, and that not all Stack Exchange proposals ought to be accepted. We should understand that the Wikipedia community thinks that some articles ought to be deleted.
If you disagree that this article should be deleted, it's ok to argue the case against it, but keep in mind that it's not a numbers-based vote. Merely stuffing a ballot won't work - well-crafted informative arguments, or improving the referencing in the article, is more useful.
While I can't edit that article conscientiously (obvious conflict of interest, after all), I can say its pretty lack luster.
Problems off the top of my head...
It's about the Stack Exchange network, but makes no real reference to stackexchange.com.
The Stack Exchange 1.0 section lacks references to any sites (MathOverflow.net would probably be the exemplar there), and focuses almost entirely on pricing. This is doubly weird, as nobody was ever charged to my knowledge (although prices were published).
The 2.0 section is very out of date, with no site references (Ask Ubuntu might be an interesting discussion, and should be cite-able).
I'll skip over the Criticisms section, again because of conflict of interests.
Don't really think Site Creation is worthwhile as written. It should probably be tossed, or greatly simplified and rolled into the 2.0 section.
References are probably the biggest problem: 20 of the current references are straight from the sites, the blogs, or Jeff and Joel. I'd suggest removing the references to questions/answers/site-proposals as those probably don't qualify as reliable sources.
As for new references... well, get googling I guess.
An obvious one, that may be integratable*:
http://techcrunch.com/2010/11/25/stack-overflow-hits-10m-uniques-boldly-goes-where-no-qa-site-has-gone-before/ (as much as I've come to dislike TechCrunch, personally)
*I say may, as adding references for references sake would be very bad.
As Andrew said, efforts are much better spent improving the article rather than trying to sway any deletion vote.
Anybody looking to improve the article should probably familiarize themselves with Wikipedia's deletion guidelines. If I understand correctly, improvements would need to be done with the next 48 hours or so.