Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natami (2nd nomination)
clearly notable as in , since the number and content of the mentioned sources give a clear impression of a remarkable international relevance in IT and not being a small 1 person project. Also refer to ''For articles of unclear notability, deletion should be a last resort.'' This guideline seems to have missed entirely on the first AfD. It is disturbing to see, that it appears one user is very obsessed with deletion and discrediting all generally accepted seconard sources, using good rhetoric but failing substantial prove or not answering at all, when he gets caught.  Also refer to  ''are *largely* not acceptable.'' This guideline is surely not a kill criteria for ignoring entirely all available infos from blogs that are existing supplementary to the already mentioned source matching WP criteria as as a second source
— User:Met, 17:19, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:N||WP:SPS (Wikipedia:Notability)