This is my long explanation of why I tend to speak against deleting/restoring things in a piecemeal fashion 
I personally find it to be unhelpful in the long run to take borderline cases through a deletion or review process when the principles of the situation have not reached consensus. I realize that reasonable people may disagree with this and instead support using this a method to build up precedents. However I believe decisions without any consensus on underlying principles are too weak to consider a precedent, and such piecemeal cases instead lead to a destructive cycle of repetitive reviews. I would encourage nominators of such cases to work to wards consensus on the basic principles of how Wikisource should handle a broader category of works rather than on one particular example.