Deletion of Gay and lesbian retirement

Comment: per nom. Like Kornfan71, I can possibly imagine an article about the subject with proper sources but I don't think this provides even a base for such an article. Also, , right
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: Retirement communities and information about senior issues are not very well covered in WP and therefore this is a  issue, albeit one that is not under-recognized in comparison to the LGBT CSB issue!  I can see this being primarily a list-oriented article with some discussion of the issue that cites to the published works. Ideally it would fit into a set of articles about special needs populations for seniors
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Systemic bias (WP:CSB)

Comment: Nominator's statement, ''"Can't imagine that even with the best cleanup in the world it would become encyclopeadic."'' is way over . Further, with sources from New York Times, Dallas Morning News, San Francisco Chronicle and WorldNetDaily as already stated above, I find sources from L.A. Timeshttp://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-gayhousing5oct05,0,2658346.story?coll=la-home-center, USA Todayhttp://www.usatoday.com/life/lifestyle/2006-07-02-gay-seniors_x.htm, The Advocatehttp://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1589/is_n737/ai_20139067, AOL Money & Financehttp://money.aol.com/retire-in-style/senior-living-retirement-trends?photo=11, Washington Posthttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3020-2004May30.html, ABC Newshttp://abcnews.go.com/Health/LivingLonger/story?id=1245134&page=1, and American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) Magazinehttp://www.aarpmagazine.org/people/Articles/a2004-03-19-mag-straightanswers.html. As was said above, we re-write, not delete
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)