Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender & Intersex Law Association
I re-affirm my Keep sentiment as well, as we have we an established and international known LGBT organization 1) the scope of whose activities is national or international in scale, and 2) information about the organization and its activities can be verified by multiple, third-party, independent, reliable sources. The GNG is not the sole criteria we may consider, only the easiest. At Wikipedia, we do not deny such organizations because they do not seek out publicity, but instead determine if their work is noteworthy enough to merit an article. In such cases we have #Alternate criteria for specific types of organizations|other things we can consider.  Toward the assertion that a former member and past president is not independent, okay... but self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. If founder R. Douglas Elliot can be considered an established expert on the topic (and as a multi-award-winning member of the http://www.law.utoronto.ca/visitors_content.asp?itemPath=5/7/3/0/0&contentId=1768 Faculty of Law at University of Toronto, whose opinions are sought after and respected,https://www.google.com/search?q=%22R.+Douglas+Elliot%22&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1#hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&prmdo=1&tbs=ar:1&tbm=nws&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22R.+Douglas+Elliott%22+-marketwire&pbx=1&oq=%22R.+Douglas+Elliott%22+-marketwire&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=54047l57578l3l57859l12l12l0l0l0l0l282l2734l0.2.10l12l0&prmdo=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=b21b1c299310f677&biw=819&bih=474https://www.google.com/search?q=%22R.+Douglas+Elliot%22&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1#q=%22R.+Douglas+Elliott%22&hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&prmd=imvnsb&source=lnms&tbm=bks&ei=4oNIT6yDCsOuiAK2homEBA&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=7&sqi=2&ved=0CA4Q_AUoBg&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=750622e855a1c920&biw=819&bih=474 this appears more likely than not), and he chooses to write about the organization he fouded in a  neutral and |non-self-serving fashion, his work may be considered. And toward |blogs... they are not automaticaly verboten. We are not speaking here about references from some fandom's community forum, but instead about sites dealing with the interactions among educated professionals - experts in the fields of law with which they deal. Our only true concern here dealing with such a widely known and acknowldged advocacy group, is that we ensure that the article on the group remains |neutral and information therein is |sourced
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 07:19, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:ORG||WP:NPOV||WP:ABOUTSELF||WP:ABOUTSELF||WP:NPOV||WP:V (Wikipedia:Notability)