"

  Are you fing kidding me? There are 30+ reliable sources listed in the pre-vandalism history of the page. This debate in this talk page has no importance and will not receive justice. I am making my objections public for the sake of posterity alone. If you want to see the sources:

 Go look at the history of the page pre-vandalism.
 Go look at the history of the talk page pre-vandalism.
 Go look at the previous AfD discussion where 30+ sources are extensively discussed and analyzed, and consensus found that they were reliable according to the wikipedia definition of ""reliable"" which you have not familiarized yourself with. 

This debate has already been done and it's very visible in the history of the page and the previous AfDs; the history which has not been consulted by the current deleters attacking this page. Without an ""admin in my pocket"" my claims fall on deaf ears; I understand this all too well. If you or your allies were interested in due process, you would examine the history instead of asking that all that labour be repeated. Your kind will always demand that others do all the work even when it has been done in exhaustive detail. When you've read this entire page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Law_of_One then you may speak without embarassing yourself. Anyone who has not read that entire page and understood the poles of the debate speaks from ignorance and exposes themselves as lazy deleters happy to erase hours and hours of work without a care. Shame on all of you for your intellectual laziness, dishonesty, and irresponsible deleter reflexes.   

 Screenshot of the Sources Pre-Vandalism 

  — Preceding unsigned comment added by  (talk • contribs)  "