Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clear Expansion Committee


 * 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   delete.  MBisanz  talk 04:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Clear Expansion Committee

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

Lacks significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Cirt (talk) 05:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Cirt (talk) 05:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete since I can't find any sources that discuss this in any kind of detail (one hit on Google News, of questionable authority); moreover, the 'controversy' section suggests this is an attack page. Drmies (talk) 05:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Secondary sources found so far:
 * Probably not a source for the article itself, but it is discussed by David S. Touretzky, Ph.D., here: The link between rank-and-file Scientologists and Narconon appears to be the "Clear Expansion Committee". This programme, discussed in more detail on the Organisations page, "is an umbrella which coordinates all individual scientologists and groups involved in these activities so as to dramatically expand Scientology in your area". .. Scientologists are encouraged to volunteer for Scientology-related entities such as Narconon, Criminon, Applied Scholastics, The Way to Happiness groups and so on, to help "really clear one's community". When Narconon UK was assigned a "Non-Existence Program" by Narconon International in May 1995, one of the tasks listed in the programme was to "utilize the people who have volunteered through the Clear Expansion Committee".
 * But that's it so far. Cirt (talk) 06:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * But that's it so far. Cirt (talk) 06:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. It would make sense for the news coverage of this sort of thing to be pretty scant, but it seems that, for instance, the third document in the reference list (the directory) has been posted on wikileaks.  It has been sitting there since the beginning of 2002, and there are documents relating to this dating back to 1994 in wikileaks as well.  --Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 06:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - not notable; not worth complaining about the errors, not worth fixing. --Justallofthem (talk) 17:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * author's comment - I submitted the article because not easy to publicly obtain Scientology documents such as HCOPL are widely accepted in the Scientology category. (Copies of the referenced documents in this article are posted at Wikileaks) Materials in some well known critics' websites are also accepted as references.  This is naturally a highly controversial Committee - evidence to support that non-secular Scientology organizations are also aimed at promoting Scientology, contradicting what the Church of Scientology claims.  This comment is for the defense of a. document source and b. notability.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccasci (talk • contribs) 23:17, 3 March 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.