Deletion of Jehovah's Witnesses and salvation (2nd nomination)

Comment: The article is, or has the potential to be as notable as Salvation in Catholicism.  The concerns about secondary sources are pendantry in the extreme, and a distortion of the intent of rimary.  As Willie said, we have to consider the ''reasons'' for wanting secondary sources, and they don't apply to this article, as long as we don't start putting judgements in the article about whether the beliefs are true. For instance it says ''"All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source"'', and of course none of those belong in this article.  The only relevant question for this article is 'Do they believe it?', and secondary sources are largely irrelevant to this question... there are no individual claims in the article, supported by primary sources, that could possibly be challenged by a reasonable person, because the article is about what they believe
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P)