Deletion of People's Liberation Front (group)

Comment: You have got to be kidding me.  Some Hacker Guy claims to run a "liberation group," and based almost entirely on self-referential bits off of his own website, that's supposed to sustain an article?  This AfD has been up for two weeks now, and not only is that more than enough time to uncover |multiple, reliable, independent sources discussing the subject in "significant detail", as the GNG enjoins us to do, an article cannot be sustained without them.  Not only are we ''not'' required to keep an article indefinitely just because of the fuzzy premise that such sources must be out there, somewhere, anywhere, we're required to delete an article which lacks them, and I'm unimpressed by the creator's assertions, backed by nary a shred of genuine proof.  It is not enough that the subject be mentioned in passing, as it is in the CNET article proffered as evidence of notability.  The subject must be discussed in "significant detail," and it is not, there or in any other reliable source.  It's defensible that an article might be sustained for this Chris Doyon, though he comes off more as a pathetic self-promoter than anything else, but that's another debate, and isn't pertinent here.  This fails  and likely  as well
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:IRS||WP:GNG||WP:BULLSHIT)