The result was Keep per sources identified in this debate. Davewild (talk) 11:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Original research, neologism, unreferenced. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 09:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Although RMHED's argument is based upon not looking for actual sources that document the subject, so it seems are the arguments of all of the other editors above, as well.
I encourage all editors to read Wikipedia:Deletion policy, Wikipedia:Guide to deletion#Nomination, and User:Uncle G/Wikipedia triage. Unverifiability means that no sources exist, not that no sources are cited. You are supposed to look for sources yourselves. An article is only unverifiable if you don't find any, having looked. Moreover, having multiple editors doing so is the safeguard that is intended to be incorporated into the AFD process. You don't help to improve the encyclopaedia by not doing the research at AFD and instead simply parroting the nominator. Neither are you being of any help at all to AFD. Uncle G (talk) 02:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]