Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sensible Charlotte Area Transportation


 * 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. --Core desat 00:49, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Sensible Charlotte Area Transportation

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article is on a subcommittee of the Charlotte Board of Elections. That board is not notable and its subcommittee is even less notable. They recommended a referendum, but that's about the extent of their duty. This may be of local interest, possibly, but I see no notability beyond that. I originally speedy deleted this as CSD as a non-notable group. Since it was recreated, I decided to bring it here so the creator can get more views on it instead of just mine. Metros 19:04, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Is it even a subcommittee? Sounds more like a citizens' group. Delete unless lots of evidence of notability is provided, since almost every referendum is going to have at least one group like this, if not two or more.--SarekOfVulcan 19:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Clearly not notable - minor coverage in local media does not add up to notability. MarkBul 19:52, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Smerge a mention of the referendum activity to Charlotte Area Transit System. (BTW, I think by "established with" they mean 'registered with".) --Dhartung | Talk 19:55, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete As mentioned above this article is clearly not notable, if only the local media can provide any coverage and minor at that, then it's not notable and should be deleted. Xtreme racer 20:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. Non-notable organization that will probably go away when the election is over. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 20:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete As per above votes. Liempt 21:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as violating a core pillar - WP:POV. Not notable, and we are not a news outlet. Salt it this time. Bearian 21:26, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above, violates our core pillars and notability as well.  Bur nt sau ce  22:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep second time I have added my opinion, but anti-article users delete my opinion with detailed comments here, instead added several further references to article Hoopsworldscout 06:00, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Most of the references in question are more related to events rather than the subject of the article. The article that inroduces the subject in the opening paragraphs doesn't seems marginally related. Another one is an official website, which doesn't give notability. --Sigma 7 10:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The first time you added a comment on this page was before there was an actual AFD. Metros 10:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. And for the record, I'm not going to make a joke about the name. SCAT? Really? humblefool&reg; 07:35, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That already was brought up by The Charlotte Observer (April 7, 2007) The elevator | Up, down, or stalled? Today's topics: Ashes, worms and scat. Page 12A. (asserting that the group is seemingly innocent to "dictionary definition No. 3" meaning of SCAT being a slang term for coprophilia, a sexual fetish involving feces.) -- Jreferee   T / C  15:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete I can't tell from SCAT or CATS article... is there a referendum scheduled? If so, why no mention in this article? Come back when there is. Mandsford 00:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete A POV article about a political action committee focussed on one small issue in one small town. Every town has a plethora of such petition-circulating groups opposed to or favoring some tax or bond issue. Has a couple of passing references or brief coverage in the Charlotte Observer, but is the online "Rhinotimes" which contains several of the refs a reliable source? Their motto is "the Newspaper with All the Rumors Fit to Print."  Seems to fail WP:N. Edison 14:41, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep And what about The Charlotte Observer references? And Topix.com references?  I am a Charlotte resident. Charlotte has 750,000 people and 2.2 million in its metro region.  22nd largest city in America.  Please name one other referendum committee in Charlotte with this much exposure.  I will update the text as stated in sources to reflect the referendum per Mandsford's concern.  Then everyone else decides.  Hoopsworldscout 03:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have struck this !vote as Hoopsworldscout already !voted several comments up. Metros 10:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Importance/significance is a CSD A7 issue, not a notability issue. There is enough material from reliable sources that are independent of SCAT to create an attributable article such that the topic meets Notability. It is surprising to see so many WP:IDONTLIKEIT !votes. -- Jreferee   T / C  14:59, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I would have gone with a Merge to Charlotte Board of Elections, but that article does not exist. Vegaswikian 23:13, 27 September 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.