Deletion of Medal "For services in the field of military cooperation"

Comment: The keep !votes are entirely based on feeling and opinion and have failed to support the keep !votes with any policies or guidelines, or reliable, independent secondary sources. The arguments that ''"It was approved by Law..."'', that it is available on other wikis, and other stuff exists are not valid reasons that demonstrate notability. Subjects are notable because they have significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent, secondary sources that addresses the topic '''directly and in detail''' . The sources provided are not secondary sources independent of the subject. None of the keep !votes has provided (or even attempted to provide) sources that meet  criteria for notability. Its existence is not enough to prove , and it is not enough to merit inclusion. "Information should not be included in this encyclopedia solely because it is true or useful" . &nbsp;&nbsp;//&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:RS||WP:N||WP:WWIN)

Comment: Based on the above overturn of the close, I strongly urge everyone to support their comments with policies, guidelines and sources, not invalid personal opinions and feelings. Since this close has been overturned and relisted, the eventual close will without doubt be evaluated based on !votes which are supported by policies and guidelines per  (''"Consensus is not based on a tally of votes, but on '''reasonable, logical, policy-based arguments'''."''), not  opinion votes without support from policies and guidelines. &nbsp;&nbsp;//&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:CLOSEAFD||WP:ILIKEIT)

Comment: I believe that we should treat officially established awards and medals given out by a nation as being notable if reliable sources, including official sources, prove that they exist and are indeed official national awards. I can't and any previous discussion on this, or any relevant guideline, but it seems to have been longstanding practice. I think this is a case where an argument based on  is in fact valid, as a matter of precedent. I set before you :Category:Military awards and decorations by country and its many sub cats such as :Category:Military decorations and medals of South Africa. A  few examples, taken from that cat, are Ad Astra Decoration, Closure Commemoration Medal, Colonial Auxiliary Forces Officers' Decoration, Distinguished Conduct Medal (Natal), Efficiency Decoration (South Africa), Good Service Medal, Bronze  iPhrothiya yeBhronzi and from other national categopries Cross of Honour and Military Merit, Order of Bohdan Khmelnytsky, Order of Danylo Halytsky, Order For Courage, and Turkish Armed Forces Medal of Distinguished Service. These are all supported largely or solely through official sources. Ther should probably be an SNG on this topic, but I think this is as good a place as any to start one, as SNGs ususlly start with practice
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OSE)

Comment: Article does not meet .  did not reveal  '''independent''' of the subject that addressed the topic '''directly and in detail''' beyond  mentions. : "Information should not be included in this encyclopedia solely because it is true or useful." Another option would be to create an article '''Military Awards of the Republic of Azerbaijan''' and merge all of the Azerbaijani award articles which do not meet criteria for their own individual article, into one article that could (probably) meet . &nbsp;&nbsp;//&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BEFORE||WP:RS||WP:ROUTINE||WP:NOTEVERYTHING||WP:GNG)