Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Carolina Stop Torture Now


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 13:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

North Carolina Stop Torture Now

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

Does not appear to satisfy WP:N after search - lack of significant relevant coverage. Current version vio WP:SOAP, WP:NPOV, possible WP:COI (could be resolved with rollback, however no suitable previous version found)  -wizzard2k  ( C - T - D ) 03:47, 15 June 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:40, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:00, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:00, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:01, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Whatever their goal, the notability isn't there and the article has a real COI issue. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:26, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Both nominator and Niteshift must be unaware of the layout of similar organizations' pages, such as that of NOW. The mission statement is standard. I reworked the header. The notability is instantly apparent upon following the links already provided. A quick followup revealed the group's involvement in the South Carolina state legislature's proposition of HB 1682, which makes incredulous the claims of non-notability. Truly a trivial, nearsighted, and downright erroneous nomination for AfD. Anarchangel (talk) 13:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. The organization exists, but nothing to prove notability in terms of reliable source coverage. There's one RS ref in the article related to the org, and a couple more on search, but they just prove existence. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 00:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:ORG: no significant coverage in secondary sources independent of the subject. Ray  Talk 02:56, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete limited third party coverage . LibStar (talk) 04:02, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. notability Capitalismojo (talk) 04:34, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Anarchangel. --Kristjan Wager (talk) 09:12, 22 June 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.