Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Take Care of Texas


 * 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   keep but this article is still written like an advertisement. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Take Care of Texas

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

Organization with no information or claim to notability, largely a copy/paste from another article. The Evil Spartan (talk) 22:37, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable.  Apparently created by the organization itself. I removed the ruft and text copied from Texas &mdash; G716  &lt;T·C&gt; 23:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete and Merge with Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. TruthbringerToronto has done a nice job cleaning up the article. No longer COI, but this program still does not meet notability. We can't have a separate page for every state gov't initiative. &mdash; G716  &lt;T·C&gt; 13:34, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * We cannot delete and merge, as that would violate the attribution terms of the GDFL. Regards, Skomorokh  01:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.   -- &mdash; G716  &lt;T·C&gt; 23:33, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:CORP and a WP:COI violation. Created by a user named Take Care of Texas. Wikipedia is not advertising nor a social networking site Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 01:39, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a program of a Texas state government agency, and the article now has references. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:00, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It was still created by that government agency and is still a WP:COI violation. Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 05:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure that nothing in that guideline states that the article should be deleted, especially not after it's been wholly rewritten. The Evil Spartan (talk) 05:55, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. It is referenced, conflict of interest can be addressed by editors other than the creator of the article and it is a govt organisation in the largest state in the US. WP is not paper so there is no harm in an article, which may remain short, to exist here. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 07:24, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete This article doesn't merit an article on Wikipedia and has major WP:COI issues. Artene50 (talk) 10:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Writing "This article doesn't merit an article on Wikipedia" is redundant to writing "delete", and COI issues are resolvable problems with the current version of the article, unrelated to the notability of the subject matter. Skomorokh  01:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to TCEQ rather than delete. If keep, there should be an article about different governmental initiatives to clean up the environment.  "Take Care of Texas" at one time was "Don't Mess With Texas", and there are other U.S. state and national provincial programs.  Even if not keep, there still should be such an article for such programs and ad campaigns. Mandsford (talk) 14:05, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  20:36, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. The article has has a significant amount of info added since the afd was placed. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 02:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Not sure how notable it is, but it makes claims to notability, and now passes verifiablity with sources. COI has no bearing at all. Merging Don't Mess with Texas, Take Care of Texas, Texas Campaign for the Environment into TCEQ would be better, but this is a topic for the talk pages, not AfDYobmod (talk) 09:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Not really. If you check out the three nonaffiliated links, only one actually works and mentions TCoT, and it seems rather trivial. The Evil Spartan (talk) 06:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash;Sean Whitton / 13:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep as currently referenced with multiple, non-trivial reliable sources. WP:COI is not a valid reason for deletion. Any problems with the current article are cleanup issues. Jim Miller (talk) 13:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I get it! This article has "cleanup" issues.  Good one!  Mandsford (talk) 20:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Not really. If you check out the three nonaffiliated links, only one actually works and mentions TCoT, and it seems rather trivial. The Evil Spartan (talk) 06:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep fully adequate sources for notability. DGG (talk) 20:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Not really. If you check out the three nonaffiliated links, only one actually works and mentions TCoT, and it seems rather trivial. The Evil Spartan (talk) 06:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Wow, you just said that.
 * Wow, you just said that.
 * Keep - I've cleaned it up a bit. Bearian (talk) 00:42, 31 July 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.