Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evangelicals for National Security Through International Cooperation


 * 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. Fram (talk) 13:06, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Evangelicals for National Security Through International Cooperation

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article was posted for speedy deletion as being about a company, corporation, organization, or group that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. Article does not appear to meet verifiability guidelines -- VS talk 09:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete The sources look a bit obscure and a Google search of 'Evangelicals for National Security Through International Cooperation' comes up with no references for this organisation --Nick Dowling (talk) 10:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.   —Nick Dowling (talk) 10:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete No coverage for this "event" ? Corpx (talk) 10:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Corpx, I have added coverage of the event from the United Nations, the National Association of Evangelicals, the Washington Post, and the Christian Post. I will add more.  User:Paulalexander
 * Comment Those references make no mention of 'Evangelicals for National Security Through International Cooperation'. --Nick Dowling (talk) 10:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Nuetral and Comment The titles of the references provided do not need to mention the name of this compact. Nick, were you able to read the full articles to determine if they are inappropriate references? A title search of Tikkun does show that that reference exists. I can't read the article because I do not subscribe to Tikkun; nonetheless, my lack of access to the magazine does not make the reference invalid. Unless it can be shown that the references are spurious, I'm going to assume good faith and suggest that they are not. However, I'm not sure that the two refs provided are enough to establish more than borderline notability, and I do think that the article can use some cleanup to get it beyond the state of appearing to be an advertising platform for ENSTIC.--Pgagnon999 (talk) 00:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Nevermind; I was looking at the reflist, not the reflinks imbedded in the article. I also see that the two reflist articles and ENSTIC were authored by the same person. The imbedded references seem to point to the National Association of Evangelicals not the ENSTIC. Delete (possibly merging some information with NAE) until some concrete mention of ENSTIC turns up.--Pgagnon999 (talk) 00:32, 5 February 2008 (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.