Deletion of Roma Virtual Network

Comment: It is a significant movement in migrant rights, which of its nature is underreported.  That does not mean there are ''no'' |reliable sources, merely that they may be ephemeral or harder to find. On a different scale, it's hard to find independent sources for Press Association because they will be swamped by material produced by the organisation.  (I'm a long-standing editor who coincidentally happens to be a member of their lists
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: nothing notable at all: no serious third-party sources, no significant user base (8K subscribed users is a relatively small number, and it needs a |reliable source anyway). Almost #A7|A7, I'd say
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:CSD)

Comment: Some of you newcomers seem to hold a wrong impression of what constitutes, under Wikipedia policy and guidelines, a |"reliable" source.  It is a reliable, independent, ''published'' third-party source with a proven reputation for fact-checking.  Moreover, the source must discuss the subject of the article at length; it cannot be what  calls a "trivial mention."  A mere mention of the RVN's existence on some website doesn't count ... and beyond that, Mr. Novoselsky being on the staff of the other organization disqualifies it as "independent" even if there were more than a trivial mention
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:RS)