Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CSETI


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   redirect to Steven M. Greer in order to preserve merged information edit history per requirements of GFDL. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

CSETI

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This particular organization excites the passions of various UFO-enthusiasts, the ZetaTalk crowd, and those who believe in Ashtar Galactic Command, but unlike other organizations who seem to have renown enough to have many third-party independent sources which discuss them, this particular group has received no notice from anyone outside of the parochial community. It is impossible to write an article on them for a mainstream neutral encyclopedia. What's more, the organization appears to fail our organization notability guideline. ScienceApologist (talk) 05:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions.   —Artw (talk) 06:12, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Hooray, beyond everything else, it just SCREAMS hoax to me.... Pstanton 08:43, 1 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstanton (talk • contribs)
 * Keep. The only argument for deletion appears to be lack of significant coverage (I'm not sure what Pstanton is arguing and what they are basing that argument on), but the first page of Google News results includes articles from the Times-Standard, St.Paul Pioneer Press, The Virginian Pilot, and The Washington Times. Dig a bit further and there's an article in the Star-Tribune, this from The Register and several others. Obviously not a hoax. Nominator does not state whether he searched for sources, but they seem to be easy to find.--Michig (talk) 15:14, 1 January 2009 (UTC) Multiple coverage also found in Skeptical Inquirer, which the nominator apparently considers a reliable source.--Michig (talk) 15:22, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I did look through those sources. They don't really say enough to make me think the organization is notable. However, the founder and major spokesperson may be. ScienceApologist (talk) 03:52, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * A merge to a section in Greer's article may be the best approach.--Michig (talk) 08:11, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Add sources per MChing and keep. Artw (talk) 17:06, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 00:32, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep-- "Over the years, the organization has received funds from "UFO-enthusiasts" such as NASA Ames, HP, Sun Microsystems, and the Gordon and Betty Moore foundation. Microsoft co-founder and space buff Paul Allen is also a major SETI backer." 1--Jmundo (talk) 02:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC) Oops. Still Keep per sources found in Google News about CSETI.--Jmundo (talk) 04:24, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You're misinterpreting the source. The Reg is talking about SETI, not this particular *ahem* wacko group. ScienceApologist (talk) 03:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete/Redirect IMO a bit of non-policy judgment needed here. While there are a few articles mentioning the organization, they're mostly related to the notability of Steven M. Greer, who's founded several such organizations.  The most we can write about it from RS is a couple of lines and that would fit better in the Steven M. Greer article as a redirect.  Also recommend  this comedy get archived somewhere before deletion.  Phil153 (talk) 04:31, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect to founder; just merge and redirect or whatever if required by the GFDL. Greer has received enough outside notice to be notable, but this does not transfer to each of his projects. - Eldereft (cont.) 21:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - I merged a bit of the CSETI information into a section in Steven M. Greer (leaving the CSETI article intact). Phil153 (talk) 21:33, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.