Deletion of Vietnam Veterans for Factual History

Comment: but perhaps Txantimedia can clarify things.  Since it's an advocacy group, I don't think POV is a big deal (although there might be an issue of |undue weight in the Reception section of the Burns/Novick documentary at the moment...).  Notability seems the bigger issue.  The vast, vast majority of the references aren't really references, or are  source articles by members themselves.  If somebody decides to establish a new philosophy and "reference" the Bible, the Declaration of Independence, or the Communist Manifesto, etc., while those sources might ''inform'' this philosophy, they aren't really references about the philosophy itself.  It's the same problem here: there's a lot of references to other stuff (Swift Boat Vets, Books written by authors the VVFH like, etc.), but do these references talk about the VVFH?  What references are to articles that actually talk about the VVFH?  From the "The Vietnam War" Burns documentary article, apparently ''The Washington Times'' had a ''brief'' story concerning them (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/nov/21/inside-the-beltway-vietnam-veterans-challenge-ken-/ Vietnam veterans challenge Ken Burns on the accuracy of his epic documentary), but this is not a very deep article; it's practically a press release where they just regurgitate some claims.  {{ping|Txantimedia}} Are there sources by non-VVFH members out there that talk about, specifically, the VVFH, not the Vietnam War?  And do so in some detail, rather than simply acknowledging they exist, or are an interview with a member
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE||WP:PRIMARY)