Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Creation Science Association of Mid America


 * 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   merge to List of participants in the creation-evolution controversy .  MBisanz  talk 00:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Creation Science Association of Mid America

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

Unnotable, marginal organization in pseudoscience community. Tagged as an orphan for a year and for notablity in September. Brief mentions in three books don't assert importance. BBiiis08 (talk) 04:15, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep: mentioned in two major works on the conflict (Forrest & Gross and Scott), and received multiple mass-media mentions for its involvement in the KBOE standards (e.g. (convenience link) + a number of others that are behind pay-walls). HrafnTalkStalk(P) 05:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Being an orphan article is not a sufficient criterion for deletion. Neither is the group's pseudoscience. Article has earlier cited other sources, so three mentions in books is not the sum of the evidence. It might be accused of having marginal notablity, but is that not sufficient? Emeraude (talk) 10:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- the wub  "?!"  13:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we might need to set up a List of organisations advocating young earth creationism (or similar title) and merge this (and other similar articles) to it. I agree with the previous two posters that Wikipedia should have something on these people, but I don't think there's enough there to warrant a full article in this form.— S Marshall   Talk / Cont  14:44, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * List of participants in the creation-evolution controversy already exists, and I would not be averse to this article being merged there. cTalkStalk(P) 19:48, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep The tags cited by the nominator are no reason for deleting the article. This is a minor organization, but the article meets Wikipedia standards for notability. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:41, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to List of participants in the creation-evolution controversy per hrafn. The group is cited, but only in the context of the KBOE case. The group needs inclusion based on that, but not a unique article. Vulture19 (talk) 01:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to List of participants in the creation-evolution controversy, as suggested by hrafn, on the basis of the reasoning shown in my earlier comment.— S Marshall  Talk / Cont  11:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect per Vulture19 and S Marshall. THF (talk) 17:56, 10 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.