Deletion of Collegium ramazzini

Comment: With 76 Google News hits https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Collegium+ramazzini%22&num=20&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=nws&ei=K81KT4mXJKrk0QHat8GcDg&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=5&ved=0CA4Q_AUoBA&biw=853&bih=538&cad=cbv&sei=Ps1KT5_IOsLr0QHYsZyZDg#q=%22Collegium+ramazzini%22&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&tbm=nws&prmd=imvns&source=lnt&tbs=ar:1&sa=X&ei=P81KT8GSDeby0gH5zrGgDg&ved=0CBAQpwUoBQ&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=9268d6f80aae7cf4&biw=853&bih=538 and '''four hundred and thirty-five''' Google Scholar hits http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=&num=20&as_epq=Collegium+Ramazzini&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdtf=&as_sdts=22&btnG=Search+Scholar&hl=en, I can only conclude that the nom and the other Delete proponent completely blew off .  The proper response for a lack of adequate sourcing is to see if the article can be sourced, not a knee-jerk AfD
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)