Deletion of Pispalan kumppanuus ry

Comment: the criteria for notability are very straightforward and this organisation doesn't seem to meet them. The principle criterion, as explained at  and elsewhere, is that the subject of the article must have been "the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject". I see no evidence of this. The criterion given in the nomination explains how notability might be achieved in the case of smaller local organisations but simply having links to one or two other organisations elsewhere is insufficient. Where's the coverage by reliable independent sources? The article itself states that it's incredibly easy to set up an organisation in Finland - by implication there must be many similar organisations to this one, none of them notable
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORG)