Deletion of Jehovah's Witnesses and the United Nations (2nd nomination)

Comment: but I wouldn't object to a sensible merge – I suggest Jehovah's Witnesses and governments is not too far off). Firstly in my opinion many of the JW sources are not . Their problem is that they are neither independent nor third party. So, to provide a neutral point of view we must balance them with other points of view or resort to sources which seem to be independent and reliable. Apart from the Guardian, https://books.google.com/books?id=W1X2BgAAQBAJ Apocalypse Delayed: The Story of Jehovah's Witnesses and https://books.google.com/books?id=1ahAq4AQudgC What the Watchtower Society Doesn't Want You to Know: A Glimpse Behind the Walls of the Kingdom Halls might provide suitable material that seems to be independently (and hopefully reliably) published. They both discuss the UN aspect at length. However, in neither case does the writing look dispassionate to me. The topic of the JW position concerning the UN is notable. The issue is do we have suitable material on which to base a balanced article without resorting to  and I think AFD is not the answer to this question
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:PRIMARY||WP:SYNTHESIS)