Deletion of 7th Inspection Commission of the Workers' Party of Korea

Comment: I'm honestly a little surprised by this, but there is evidence in the sources given in the article that outside observers have examined this topic an therefore there is notability according to the GNG. The "significance' prong is, indeed, open to question but any independent reporting on organs of government in the DPRK has very little information to work with.  These look as significant as one is likely to find about any governmental topic in that necrocracy. There is room for tonal improvement but  applies
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP)

Comment: North Korea doesnt have much in the way of |independent, reliable sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: as per . I understand the rationale of the nomination, as when it was made the article was woefully undersourced.  However the improvements made by the article's creator have made it pass , and now passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard (WP:HEYMAN||WP:VERIFY||WP:GNG)

Comment: It's not possible to gauge coverage in reliable sources through a simple  search in English. A great deal of North Korean studies scholarship is conducted in South Korea in Korean. There is also lots of scholarship in Japanese and Russian and, to a lesser extent, German. At any rate, contrary to what others have said above, the Inspection Commission is one of the {{em|least}} influential bodies of the WPK: it's not the Central Committee, Politburo or Central Military Commission, which are the principal decision making bodies, of which a lot is written. Indeed, the 7th Inspection Commission was the last Inspection Commission as its duties were delegated to the Central Auditing Commission (another not-so-important body) at the party's 8th Congress this month. Furthermore, the 7th Inspection Commission was relatively short-lived (only 5 years, cf. the 36 years of its predecessor) due to the party having returned to a five-year routine of re-electing its bodies at the said congress. {{em|But none of this matters}} until someone does a proper  search in at least the languages outlined above. The ''Daily NK'' story cited in the article does suggest that the 7th Inspection Commission did see some action during its tenure, so there could be more sources out there. Finally, for the people looking for a '''merge''' target, Inspection Commission of the Workers' Party of Korea would be more comfortably notable with decades worth of potential sources. –&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:BEFORE)