Deletion of Australian Islamic Library

Comment: Sorry, I don't see it: almost all the sources listed are primary, and none of the others meet , and we can wave off any  arguments. Meeting the GNG doesn't come close to meaning that there "might" be sources that "suggest" notability.  Either there are reliable, ''independent, third-party'' sources that discuss the subject in detail or there are not.  We don't get to keep conditional articles.  If this one doesn't have such sources, then userfy it to the creator until it does
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:IRS||WP:ITSUSEFUL)

Comment: I've worked with the creator to try to get this article into shape from the position it was in when I came across it on the NPP. {{ping|Nabeelsahab}}, inclusion doesn't hinge on whether the topic would be useful to the public - Wikipedia requires evidence that the library is of significance. If scholars want to use your resources, then they can find the site online through traditional search engines. Rather, WP is a place where entries need to fulfill specific |guidelines as to |sourcing and discussion in third party sources. Please read these help articles before you add anything more to the article, because it already has a lot of self-references. You don't need to provide us with a catalogue of books here; that's for the website itself. If the criticism of the library is there in third-party sources with editorial control, it ''suggests'' the library is notable, and I'd say '''weak keep'''. However, you need to find those sources to be able to keep the article here on WP
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:RS)