Deletion of Muslim Rashtriya Manch

Comment: Non notable  of an organisation. Fails  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BRANCH||WP:GNG||WP:NORG)

Comment: meets , the  are: https://www.google.com/books/edition/Messengers_of_Hindu_Nationalism/BDqdDwAAQBAJ?&pg=PA92 Chapter 6 of the book linked above by Walter K. Andersen and Shridhar D. Damle published in 2019 by C. Hurst & Co. and distributed in the US by Oxford University Press, The Economic Times 2015 https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/rss-backed-muslim-rashtriya-manch-on-misson-to-change-mindset-of-kashmiri-youth/articleshow/49610473.cms, and Deutsche Welle 2017 https://www.dw.com/en/indian-muslims-who-support-hindu-nationalism/a-39873638. Put "Muslim Rashtriya Manch" into  or Google News and there is a lot of other coverage, e.g., India Today 2019 https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/telangana-muslims-bjp-mega-membership-drive-amit-shah-hyderabad-1561306-2019-07-03, Indo-Asian News Service via The New Indian Express 2019 https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2019/aug/30/this-rss-body-is-a-bridge-between-muslims-and-sangh-2026565.html, and https://www.newslaundry.com/2016/03/02/meet-the-nationalist-muslims-of-rss-affiliate-muslim-rashtriya-manch Newslaundry 2016 (not sure if that one is an RS). I also think this Hindustan Times 2014 article https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/the-saffron-muslim/story-sxdXyHOdasvoBCnV858EWL.html counts as GNG because it is both an interview and also independent reporting in the journalist's own voice. I also think The Washington Post 2019 opinion piece https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/30/how-indias-bjp-cultivated-muslim-front-its-hindu-nationalism/ counts for notability even if it's opinion. But even without the HT and WaPo, and take out the routine or otherwise questionable stuff, this is still a GNG keep based on the sourcing out there
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:THREE||WP:RSSE)

Comment: per above and . Relevant informatin should be added to Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:INHERITORG)

Comment: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/the-saffron-muslim/story-sxdXyHOdasvoBCnV858EWL.html This source, for example, is far from "routine coverage". I am concerned about the speed at which this user sends articles for deletion and whether they are actually conducting a . This is one of the three articles they AfD'd in eight minutes and another user expressed a similar concern on
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: clearly a notable organization. The fact that you might |dislike the organization is irrelevant in an AfD debate
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)