Deletion of Operation Iraqi Home Protector

Comment: I do not agree with this recommendation to delete this article.  The fact is this is a named military operation in an recent ongoing conflict and it simply hasn't been going on long enough to hit the history books yet.  It is also my opinion that the reference is from a good source so it shouldn't be a problem.  Perhaps this is a good example of the  policy. Just because the references are scarce does not make it non-notible.  I would state that any names military operations is notible and should qualify to have an article on wikipedia even if its only a stub
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (WP:IAR)

Comment: There is, as I understand it, only one source given here (for some reasone as an external link rather than a as a reference), the Press Release by the Iraqi National Force website about this operation. This is not an independent source, since the military operation in question was conducted by the Iraqi National Force and the press release is written to publicize it. The link is OK as a primary source for verifiability purposes but it does not go towards establishing notability per . I looked around on the web and could not find anything else that passes  and . A plain GoogleSearch gives just 9 hits http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=%22Operation%20Iraqi%20Home%20Protector%22&sa=N&tab=nw. One of them gives a copy of the above mentione press releasehttp://iraqsinconvenienttruth.com/2007/07/26/iraqi-army-conducts-independent-operation-tips-lead-to-weapons-cache/. There is also a couple of paragraphs in the news letter "The Advisor" of the Multi-National Security Transition Command – Iraq, attributed as "Multi-National Division – North Public Affairs". There is also one mention in what seems to be a bloghttp://olbroad.com/2007/07/26/was-this-on-the-news/. As far as I can tell, that's it. There is nothing, in GoogleNewshttp://news.google.com/archivesearch?hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tab=wn&q=%22Operation+Iraqi+Home+Protector%22 and nothing anywhere else that I could find. Even if one takes the generous view and considers the "Advisor" article as an independent source, this is still miles away from satisfying the requirements of . I have read carefully the passionate keep arguments above. I certainly appreciate the feelings behind them, but from the point of view of Wikipedia policies and quidelines, these arguments just do not hold water. It is quite possible that in the future there will be books written about this operation and it will become quite famous. But we have to wait until that happens and if it does, there will be no problem with including an article about this operation on WP. See , "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball". It does not have to be a book, of course, if there are several journal/newpaper/magazinge/etc articles, covering the subject in substantial detail, that would be enough. For now, the subject clearly fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:V||WP:RS||WP:N||WP:CRYSTAL||WP:N)