Deletion of Scots Wikipedia (3rd nomination)

Comment: The nomination does not state a valid basis for deletion; the number of articles in Scots Wikipedia is not particularly relevant to whether it deserves an article on English Wikipedia.  On the other hand, its  notability might reasonably be challenged, as it was in August 2007 when no sources were identified and the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scots Wikipedia (2nd nomination)|second AfD reached a "delete" result.  However, the article now contains a solid source from ''Scotland on Sunday'',http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/scots-finds-home-on-gey-muckle-website-1-1430165 and HighBeam produced a similar, shorter one from the  ''Daily Mirror'',http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-175269362.html, so I guess we can say that this now passes , if barely. Additional references in reliable sources would obviously strengthen the case. Although Google shows a number of discussions on forums, I haven't found much else in RS sources, other than brief mentions in some Scotland guidebooks such as http://books.google.com/books?id=cN-t1Jsc5QsC&lpg=PT114&ots=dSH1OVxf6K&dq=sco.wikipedia.org&pg=PT115#v=onepage&q=sco.wikipedia.org&f=false.  Additional background about Scots Wikipedia may be found at :meta:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Scots Wikipedia, where an overwhelming consensus affirmed the legitimacy of the project and rejected an August 2011 closure proposal
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: spaced ndash}} This nomination does not contain a valid rationale for deletion, per -REASON
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DEL)