Deletion of Thefederalist.com

Comment: Once again, we have what can only be described as a partisan witch hunt against another conservative blog. Every single argument that has been used against this blog was addressed at the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Americablog (2nd nomination)|second deletion discussion for Americablog, which was kept, and the same arguments were used (just two weeks previous to the AFD for Americablog) at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zombietime|the Zombietime AFD, which was deleted. There is a clear double standard on Wikipedia when it comes to blogs, and it's time that the editors here recognize that the problem is getting noticed by more and more sources, and it is going to increase the credibility gap. Don't bother to cite ; I've been here long enough to know the criteria for that argument, and recognize that it only applies when the argument runs against the dominant paradigm here. Before you flame me (and I'm sure that I'll be flamed) please read though those two AFDs and recognize that there is little difference (except for the outcome) between those two discussions, and how closely that they both parallel to this discussion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:WAX)

Comment: while the ''Federalist Society'' is notable, |in no way does a website inherit independent notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: Pretty easily passes  "The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself." Just from the Neil deGrasse Tyson stuff, not to mention a lot of the sources provided here.  The case for inclusion would be way easier if the article were unlocked so we could improve it based on what has been brought up here.  Also, the timing of this AfD is horrible
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEBCRIT)