Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Committee of Concerned Journalists


 * 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. John254 00:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Committee of Concerned Journalists

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Procedural nomination; I've just removed a prod on this ("Non-notable group, with no sources. PRODed once before... but seems to have gone..."), as this is clearly inaccurate; a brief google-skim shows over 60,000 hits, including plenty of apparent reliable sources. I'm about to go off for six days and am very unlikely to have time to expand/rescue this before the prod expires, so bringing it over here to let someone else check the sources and see if this actually is expandable/rescuable. (Incidentally, the "prodded once before" is inaccurate - there's nothing in the deletion log & no deleted edits in the history.) Despite my procedurally nominating this for deletion, I (provisionally pending checking of the apparent sources) !vote keep. —  iride scent   (talk to me!)  23:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment That prod was me - I was using TW to prod, and it warned the creator, but didn't apply the prod template. Sorry if it was unclear ;-) Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry 00:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I see that they show up in some reliable sources, such as NPR, so it seems like they are notable enough for inclusion, even if the article needs a bit of work. Sχeptomaniacχαιρετε 23:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. jonathan (talk — contribs) 23:36, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The nom voted keep. Smashville 20:40, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per nom and Sxeptomaniac. --Mkativerata 23:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Despite me prodding it. Articles like this generally get started as an advert of sorts and then never touched again - if someone is willing to remove the prod and have a go at it, I'm happy to support them! Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry 00:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as long as it gets worked on. It won't last too long if no one does. —Signed by KoЯn fan71 My TalkSign Here! 00:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Satisfies notability. I'll see if I can beef it up a bit. Pigman 02:08, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I'd also like to mention that John Seigenthaler, Sr. of the Seigenthaler controversy was honored by the CCJ and apparently is a member. Not that this would influence the debate but just sayin'... Pigman 02:56, 10 October 2007 (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.