Deletion of Al Fand training camp

Comment: I'm taken aback at the vehemence of Sherurcij's Keep argument, which throws up a good deal of rhetoric flying in the teeth of  ''without actually addressing the nom's argument.'' I am astonished that an editor of longstanding has racked up over 30,000 edits without being aware that |Wikipedia is not a publisher of first instance, or that - far from being optional -  is the fundamental, irreducible value of the encyclopedia.  It is not remotely enough, as Sherurcij ought to know, to assert that ''someday'' |reliable sources might exist which satisfy the requirement of multiple, third-party, reliable sources discussing the subject in significant detail.  They must be present now, and so far they are not.  Failing that, policy holds that an article cannot be sustained
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF||WP:NOT||WP:V||WP:RS)

Comment: per ''Snowball Keep'' of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdullah Abu Masood camp; these seem to all be nominated by the same person, attempting to perform Damnatio memoriae and introduce deletionist censorship into WP, not for the purpose of maintaining a higher-standard encyclopaedia, but because they bear a personal dislike of the article's subject and feel it is "unworthy" to merit an article - while they have never suggested (per this example) that one of the ~40 USMC bases, or any of the :Category:United States military bases of the Vietnam War merit deletion; instead they just find the military bases, military leaders and military history of their ideological "enemies" and suggest they all be deleted.  assures us that there is no limit to the number of articles that can exist, and an article like this one - although a stub right now - will one day include information on who started the base, when the Americans (or others) attacked it, how many died, whether it affected the outcome of any battles, and the like. It merits patience in waiting for future revelations about the camp. It is ''notable'' now, and the article will be ''complete'' in the future...just like millions of other stubs
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTPAPER)