Deletion of The New Authorized Version

Comment: the LOLCat Bible Translation Project has more mentions in reliable sources than this translation does. Totally agree on the promotional bit too. Fails  and possibly 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:PROMO)

Comment: Sadly, because the idea of a fresh, machine-translated version of the bible's original text is intriguing. However there is absolutely nothing out there that I can find to demonstrate |notability. I don't even think it's a : there's not a whiff of academic respectability from the site itself, and a cursory perusal of the text makes the whole thing look like a massive copy and paste job. I suspect the 'sharing' aspect is its raison d'être - i.e. it's an email and and social contacts harvester
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: does not meet , have been unable to find enough |useable sources, did find https://books.google.com.au/books?id=kn8wCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA16&lpg=PA16&dq=new+authorised+version+av7+bible&source=bl&ots=Gdf4FoCACZ&sig=ZcoNU3pdW1EqV9bUdAOOJV_nrVQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjAoOOHhuTQAhVL6GMKHZUoDHEQ6AEITTAJ#v=onepage&q=new%20authorised%20version%20av7%20bible&f=false this (from ''English Language Bible Translators'') but more is needed, note that this bible version is not mentioned at List of English Bible translations, no issue with it being mentioned there
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:RS)

Comment: Not only is there no credible claim of notability (so there's a  issue) the article itself is written in promotional terms, right down to the part that tells you to go to the website that sells it if you want more information. This is not what encyclopaedic language sounds like
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)