Deletion of Tree of life garden

Comment: Contested PROD is not a reason for deletion. The article is not unreferenced, but I concede it is poorly referenced. This is easily fixed; there are links within the referenced Yesod, . There is assertion without evidence (other than Rankiri's), that it is non-notable. There is assertion of PoV without evidence (with the notable exception of Rankiri. This also is fixable). "Admits" is entirely the wrong language to use; Andyjsmith is mistaken to think proof of the author's intentions is proof of . Please show evidence that the article content itself does not "maintain a neutral point of view" or contains "overly abundant links and references to autobiographical articles". The author's motivations are entirely separate from the content of the article. That the business would benefit from the garden's inclusion on WP is not our concern, only the content of the article. Note promotion in  only covers "Advertising or other spam without relevant content". Note also that  is largely a rehash of other rules in the context of self-authorship, and therefore alleging both self-promo and PoV is redundant. I concede that there is a certain degree of enthusiasm for the subject, but that is easily cleaned up. Now, this is how you show evidence ''that needs to be cleaned up in the article''. This is how I would phrase it on the ''Talk page discussion'': in the phrase "...in the center of the patio in Hebrew is the Shema Yisrael, the password given to Abraham explaining that God's creation..." 'explaining' is an example of PoV. It puts the reader in the shoes of someone who has a faith-based belief in the Shema Yisrael and the beliefs surrounding it, which is an uncomfortable position for someone who doesn't. I dispute Rankiri's assertion that "the first of its kind to ever be built" is PoV. It is a statement of truth, that has verifiability problems because it asserts a negative, namely, "no such garden has ever been built before"; it is not a 'best burger ever' slogan which hides behind an unquantifiable aesthetic
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:PROMOTION||WP:DELETION)

Comment: None of the references are valid. No relevant results on http://news.google.com/news?q=%22Tree%20of%20life%22%20garden%20%20%22Valley%20Center%22+OR+%22El+Cajon%22 Google News, http://books.google.com/books?q=%22Tree%20of%20life%22%20garden%20%20%22Valley%20Center%22+OR+%22El+Cajon%22 Google Books, http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Tree%20of%20life%22%20garden%20%20%22Valley%20Center%22+OR+%22El+Cajon%22 Google Scholar. Numerous  and |POV issues: ''"the first of its kind to ever be built", "In entering the dome, one in effect becomes one with Yaweh", "when visitors engage in 'Ohm' chants, the effect is overwhelming"'' and so on
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:NPOV)