`  == Follow up on deletion discussion ==  We are pretty far off topic on the AfD, so I thought I would bring it here. Do please review our policies on assuming good faith and civility, as it is difficult to spin accusations of FUD and trolling into a positive light. I find it a little galling that you are (repeatedly) juxtaposing insults and requests for assistance. Do not expect any help in response to such posts.  Short summary of how we got here: I followed WP:BEFORE prior to nominating the article for deletion, so I already had a decent idea of what sources (or lack thereof) are available. I have of course been wrong before (to be precise, 7.6% of the time over my 210 nominations), which is why we solicit feedback during a discussion. Explaining why a source is borderline or inadequate in the context of notability is not negativity; it is part of the discussion. A deletion discussion is in itself, I suppose, an inherently negative process but I am not really aware of any way to sugar-coat that. If I were able to produce examples of sources that exhibit notability of the subject, I would have added them to the article rather than nominate it for deletion in the first place.  You also expressed concern about my recent edits to the article, which were an effort to cut through the ``noise`` that I mentioned in the deletion discussion. I tried to explain the reason for each removal in my edit summaries, but if you have any specific concerns or questions please let me know.   `