Deletion of How the Stats Really Stack Up: Cosleeping Is Twice As Safe

Comment: as the notability of the subject is not apparent.  Put simply, this fails  due to the lack of reliable independent sources that even mention the subject, let alone provide significant coverage.  In fact, I could find only a single reference to the article in a reliable source (http://books.google.com/books?id=LYouGEiizucC&pg=PA160&lpg=PA160&dq=%22How+the+Stats+Really+Stack+Up:+Cosleeping+Is+Twice+As+Safe%22+-wikipedia&source=bl&ots=HNQp9CNHn9&sig=LMApcL5gTul3pyQjaiOB74Mam_E&hl=en&ei=Lt68S7zpCYnu0gTRoK37Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=15&ved=0CDkQ6AEwDg here), and that merely cited the article - it did not offer detailed information about the article as a subject in its own right.  As a general rule, I would suggest that very few articles should have WP articles about them (with the possible exception of highly notable articles such as Einstein's On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies); most articles simply aren't that notable in the grand scheme of things, and this magazine article is no exception
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: per the above. The subject of Co-sleeping is quite notable, and our article on the subject appears to be neutral and well-sourced. If this paper meets our |reliable source policies, then we should include it there. But the paper itself isn't notable, and shouldn't have its own article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)