Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Copwatch


 * 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 of the debate was KEEP. -Splash talk 00:22, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Copwatch
Non-notable civic organization. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - &lt;*&gt; 18:56, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Catherine breillat 19:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. ¡Dustimagic!  ( T / C ) 00:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I heard about this organization offline. here is an image mentioning the Austin branch. I can easily see someone seeing a listing for their local copwatch meeting and searching here. I think the article probably needs cleanup though. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 03:35, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems quite a lot of people are involved in this organization.  JeffBurdges 16:38, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, collectively notable organizations. -Sean Curtin 19:49, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per gtrmp/jeffburdges.Tombride 02:56, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Not really an organization, but is still notable. It's going on everywhere. Canaen  03:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. notable group. Peter G Werner 03:59, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable phenomenon (not really a single organization). There are chapters in several US cities and Copwatch is regularly in the news in the US. If people see a story about Copwatch, this should be a good place for them to learn about it. Definitely needs cleanup and expansion.Mycota 06:15, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have seen them on various indymedia sources and even freespeech tv, so I think they are fairly notable. The Ungovernable Force 02:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Looks to be an almost nationwide organization. Many google hits and many recent google news hits . Nom makes no case at all for deletion, although I would thank him for taking the trouble to spell out NN. Given Copwatch's importance, uniqueness and reach and the media attention, it would seem that this is exactly the kind of page we need here. -- JJay 19:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I love articles that reference their own websites, love to see them deleted since they don't belong here. Mike (T C) [[Image:Star_of_life2.svg|20px]] 05:47, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd also like to add that there is no third party references, ie news papers etc. Mike (T C) [[Image:Star_of_life2.svg|20px]] 21:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've added a few. Feel free to add more since there are many hundreds of articles on this group. Of course, the article as it stands is already better referenced than such articles as Police, gun or justice- none of which have any references. Perhaps those articles should be deleted. -- JJay 22:12, 30 March 2006 (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.