Deletion of Independent Gay Forum

Comment: I expected this to be easy to source considering how often Andrew Sullivan and Jonathan Rauch blather about it. But as the nom said, not so easy. It appears their popularity has tapered as of late, and much of the direct sources of notability have been sucked away by media companies who don't like to host their own content after three months. However, using  criterion 3, "''The content is distributed via a medium which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster''", we have reliable sources that attest this has occurred. First, the New York Press tells us that "''The Wall Street Journal|WSJ’s online OpinionJournal.com|Opinion Journal went even further, pulling in a piece by gay writer Paul Varnell on the gay conservative site Independent Gay Forum.''"http://www.nypress.com/15/20/news&columns/signorile.cfm I don't see an explicit date on that piece, but it says "''Pim Fortuyn, who was brutally assassinated last week''", so that gives us an idea. Second, the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance are using a citation to a piece from the Independent Gay Forum titled "''Punishing gays under Islam''" which, according to their citation,http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_isla1.htm was published in the Chicago Free Press on 21 October 2001. Chicago Free Press doesn't have their own Wikipedia article, but they do get their content republished by Lynn Conway at the University of Michigan,http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Chicago%20Free%20Press/Chicago%20Free%20Press%20EDITORIAL%208-09-06.htm so they would pass  themselves (although it is never a requirement for any source to be  enough to have its own article to nevertheless be used as a ). So that's two instances of satisfying  criterion 3, and either one of those instances alone would be enough. So, yeah, notable, barely, but definitively. —&nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB||WP:WEB||WP:N||WP:RS)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)