Deletion of WEB (Top Secret)

Comment: as these articles have no primary references to |verify their sources, no |reliable secondary sources to demonstrate |notability outside of Top Secret (role-playing game). These articles fail #PLOT, and their heavy in universe perspective means it fails , and has little in the way of real-world content, context or analysis. The nomination is very clearly justified; there are no sober agruments for keeping this |fancruft. This topic appears to be little more than fodder for a stock conspiracy theory
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:RS||WP:FICT||WP:NOT||WP:WAF||WP:FANCRUFT)

Comment: Nom should be withdrawn as it didn't follow guidelines for this type of Wikipedia:Notability#Articles not satisfying the notability guidelines| thing .  The idea here is to have verifiable, notable, ''topics''.  This one may or may not be.  But in |good faith should work with others to find out, or at least give them time
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:GF)

Comment: none of the above keep votes, including those from the two editors who have contributed elsewhere, address the concerns I put forward.  Although the ORION foundation and WEB organisations appear in multiple places in the TSSI line, there is no non-trivial independent coverage; and as such the topics do not meet the |notability guidelines
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)