Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Center for Economic and Policy Research


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 02:25, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Center for Economic and Policy Research

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No claim to notability. Only sources linked to the institute (and one charity audit service, linked at the institute's site) are used. Wikipedia has articles on two notable commentators on political economy, Dean Baker and Mark Weisbrot, who founded the institue, and presumably on other fellows. It's fine that the institute is mentioned in their articles.

The article and those articles have had many edits by associates of the institute, and despite cleanup the article still suffers from non-encyclopediac prose, reading like promotional material. Kiefer .Wolfowitz  00:48, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:52, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:52, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Per WP:NOTCLEANUP and WP:BEFORE, this one is an easy keep, as both Google News and Google Scholar cite them enough to pass notability, regardless of their politics. It should be noted that the OP is entirely correct about the internal citations within the article.  The article itself is dreadful, but the entity is clearly notable, so there's no reason not to have an article about.  Cleanup can be done by anyone so interested. -- Jayron  32  23:02, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The name is a copy of the name of the leading economic and policy think-tank in the UK and the name of an institute at Stanford University. Did you examine the citations to see which was discussed (seriously, rather than incidently)? 01:29, 9 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk • contribs)
 * Yes, on the first page of Google News and of Google Scholar searches, most cites of the exact phrase "center for economic and policy research" refers to this organization. It, and its work, seems to be cited repeatedly and frequently.   and  and .  It is clear from these, and numerous others which anyone can find in the links above, that major news organizations consider them worth citing.  -- Jayron  32  01:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Your first citation seems to be a republication of a news release by a fake journal, rather than by a journalistic publication. The second citation is a short news item, mentioning Dean Baker and incidentally mentioning CERP, so it does not establish notability; the news roundup is a way to fill pages using news releases, of course. Your third article is the intro to a radio interview with 2 persons (one Baker), which again just provides the background on Baker and no discussion of CERP itself; again, an incidental mention does not establish notability. So you have no reliable sources establishing notability, yet. Please find two quality reliable sources that discuss CERP, rather than mention it, when discussing Baker or Weisbrot (or another notable affiliate, who has or deserves an article). Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  11:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, we've each said our piece. Other people will come along shortly.  There's really no need to get emotionally involved.  I've never heard of this organization in my life, but that doesn't mean it doesn't merit a Wikipedia article.  -- Jayron  32  03:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Please don't personalize the issue. Just find two RSes covering CERP, not mentioning CERP incidentally, per WP policy. The New York Times quotes CERP staff, mentioning CERP only incidentally, in the 34 articles returned by this query; there are exactly two other incidental mentions of CERP, and . Again, it seems that CERP is mentioned via Baker, Weisbrot, or other staff, but never by itself. (C.f., the similarly leftist Institute for Policy Studies, the centrist Brookings Institute, or the right Cato Institute as think tanks that are notable.)  Please remove the AGF violation alleging that my concern is politically motivated.  Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  09:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I've said nothing of the sort. I've said that I have never heard of the organization before this AFD.  -- Jayron  32  16:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You wrote "regardless of their politics", which suggested that politics was a motivation, apparently unintentionally. Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  17:10, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I hadn't intended that. Re-reading it, I can see, however, that it is certainly easy to read it that way.  I apologize for making that statement.  -- Jayron  32  17:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. :) Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  19:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, per Jayron32. More than sufficient coverage available although the article does need improvement. Nsk92 (talk) 03:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep the now shortened article. I removed material that I cannot source to reliable sources. It still has no reliable sources cited. Please find reliable sources for any material which is added. It still has no claim to notability. It no longer reads like an advertisement written by CERP staff. This AFD may be closed. Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  11:56, 10 January 2013 (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.