Deletion of Dissident Voice (second nomination)

Comment: Per a specific request, I'm offering my opinion: although the website does not appear to satisfy , agreed, I think the participation of Chomsky makes this a notable site.  The article as stands, however, needs heavy clean-up in order to be anywhere near encyclopedic. &mdash;&nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: Does not assert notability per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: Then pull it off, I am convinced that there are various groups that can disregard policy for whatever reasons. I read the previous AfD Striver, but there isn't any evidence in that article about anything that answers my nomination reasons. This is not about the content of this particular web site. This is about the lack of content about this web site anywhere else. The article needs to address and establish a reasonable atmosphere of trust with the reader that it isn't just some sort of hoax, or group of people in a basement making things up. Are there any articles in newspapers? Any awards given? Any mention by other established publishers, etc? The content itself has not been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. The website or content has not won a well known and independent award, either from a publication or |organisation. The content is not distributed via a site which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster. Those are the criteria to meet. And there isn't anything in that article that suggests that it meets those. Why not
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORG)