Deletion of La Voce di New York

Comment: Almost all sources cited in the article are to the newspaper itself. The award mentioned in the "Awards, Recognitions and Acknowledgements" section was also set up by this newspaper, not awarded to it. The only independent source cited, an article in la Repubblica https://firenze.repubblica.it/cronaca/2019/04/10/news/la_reporter_senese_gaia_pianigiani_del_new_york_times_si_aggiudica_il_premio_liberty_meets_beauty_-223691008/, contains only a couple of brief mentions of the newspaper. Nothing to show satisfying  or  here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:ORG)

Comment: I am the article's original author and I think that the point is being missed here. La Voce di New York is a solid online newspaper with contributions from a lot of people including reputable and well known Italian journalists (details provided at Talk:La Voce di New York, but I could name countless other journalists). As far as , it is not my case. While I did contribute articles to the newspaper in the past (I'm an Italian native speaker), I am not affiliated with the newspaper: I have not received any compensation, I don't plan to receive any compensation in the future, I am not part of the editorial board. Because of this, I maintain that there is no COI. Of course I followed VNY over the years, which made me knowledgeable and motivated enough to use my time to create the article. In fact, I would appreciate if the admin that is so passionately arguing for the deletion of the article could confirm that there is not some kind of reverse  at play here. About the article being promotional, I had already offered to address that issue in Talk:La Voce di New York and asked for guidance. That part was disregarded, while
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI||WP:COI)

Comment: per . News media |do not get a free article on Wikipedia, and in 2021, I would think everybody knows that after 20 years. Based on what I see, |one can not assume good faith here. There's a single mention in a single independent source. That's far below what most editors consider . I'm willing to change my mind, but to keep it would require a search for better sources and adding them to the article, or a |change in the well-settled consensus
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NOTWEBHOST||WP:AGF||WP:SIGCOV||WP:CCC)