Deletion of Amsterdam Magazine (2nd nomination)

Comment: In addition to this, the two parties pushing hard for the article's deletion have displayed an unusual amount of eagerness in removing certain sentences from the article. Edits that are made to the text are quickly erased by them within minutes. While I would like to |assume good faith it's rather impossible, especially since Guillaume has made assumptions (see his comments above) about those who have created the article, maintained it and would like to see it stay on Wikipedia. I could come to all sorts of conclusions about his motivations for being so dedicated to killing this article but I'd rather not stoop to his level
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF)

Comment: Guillaume was the first individual in this deletion debate to resort to SPAs, accusations and assumptions. He accused those defending this article of being directly involved with the magazine, not receiving salaries, being bitter, etc. Feel free to review  his comments above. If the "in favor of keeping this article" editors here are going to face these accusations, Guillaume should face the same ones. Yes, |smells |funny, indeed
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry (WP:MEAT||WP:SOCK)