Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OpEdNews (3rd nomination)
Did not find significant coverage in reliable sources to meet . Almost all of the references I was able to check that are currently cited in the article provide trivial coverage of the topic, as a minor part of a single sentence. The two articles that much of the above discussion seem to focus on are from http://docs.newsbank.com/s/InfoWeb/aggdocs/AWNB/1173106EF98EC1A8/0D7C12F5A8A2A86A ''The Intelligencer'' and http://www.financialexpress.com/story-print/457709 Financial Express. I agree the first provides significant coverage; the second is a single brief paragraph. Even if I accepted both as significant coverage, one of the arguments above is that these two sources thereby satisfy the requirements of . I take  to be much more fluid, with no specific number or types or lengths of reliable sources, whereas the argument above seems to be that two sources always meets the multiple independent reliable source requirement because two is "multiple". Different editors interpret GNG differently, but I think such a literal, most minimal interpretation ignores its intent
— User:Agyle, 21:35, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:GNG||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)