Deletion of Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009

Comment: Notability research will be expanded here later. (Add: there are now 40 in-article sources, namely, 2 Fox News, 1 Politico.com, 16 newspaper sources (articles in 25 total local papers, only 12 being letters to editor), 5 established university papers, 1 international think tank, 1 Motley Fool blog, 9 aligned sources (the Fed, WND, CFL, Gambling911, Best, GoldSeek), and 5 appropriate SPS (govtrack.us, Congress). Similarly to my comment while "winning" Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Sovereignty Restoration Act|another same-nom debate (NCDK), if 12 reliable editors publish topical letters ''on a month-old bill'', their independent judgment has cumulative effect, besides the other sources.) However, I am not able to consider this nomination in good faith based on my comments at the nominator's immediately previous lost bid at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rand Paul, where an editor was still hollering nonnotability after ''thirty'' reliable sources had been included. I am also wary of TJRC's suddenness to respond, his former PROD of this article, and what I regard as TJRC's poor merge of We the People Act. Nominator's link to Google vitiates the entire nomination, especially since redoing the search takes it up to a good mix of 50 sources including some significant duplicates http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=us&hl=en&num=100&q=%22Federal+Reserve+Transparency+Act+%22+%7C+Fed-Transparency-Act+%7C+HR1207+%7C+HR-1207&cf=all&scoring=d. Once again, nominator has failed to invoke ''any'' of the |alternatives to deletion (editing, tagging, merging, discussion, RFC, transwiki, etc.), which is especially egregious because nominator is well-aware of a good potential merge target, Ron Paul bills. Nominator has also overriden the under-construction tag, even though edits have continued to this article more often than weekly (otherwise a bot would remove the tag). Nominator's history indicates a longtime unresolved content dispute in relation to Ron Paul coverage as documented
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD)

Comment: JJB has revamped the page to include sources linked to blogs, letters to the editors of local newspapers and random people rating on the internet http://caps.fool.com/blogs/viewpost.aspx?bpid=159824&t=01004994858403520305 to establish notability.  I can't find a single one that satisfies , never mind .  As an aside, please don't just added every single hit you get from Google to an article, John.  The fact that Peter Kolar thinks that the bill is a great idea and the local daily newspaper printed his letter in the mailbag section is not encyclopedic, nor is that "milpo", a blogger at the Moltey Fool's website whose profile includes "No personal info entered", demands that we support it
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N)