Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Foundation for Educational Choice


 * 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. After 2 relistings, I consider the sources Abductive has just pointed to as sufficient to settle the issue.  DGG ( talk ) 21:59, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The Foundation for Educational Choice

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Delete We have two references. One is a link to an article about Patrick Byrne, which contains a couple of brief mentions of the Foundation for Educational Choice. The other is link to an item from the Toronto Star which is available on a pay-for view basis, but the abstract is written in the first person by a director of the foundation, and looks more like a letter to the editor or something similar than like an article. My searches for the Foundation for Educational Choice have produced mainly the organisation's own site, Wikipedia, facebook, youtube, blogspot, and pages from organisations promoting a particular political position and including the foundation as part of this promotion. Nothing at all that I have found looks like significant coverage in a reliable independent source. JamesBWatson (talk) 07:12, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note It seems that the article was produced as promotion by an employee of the foundation. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:34, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. I added some references, including one about a rally in Georgia co-sponsored by this group and the local Roman Catholic archdiocese promoting private schools. The group seems notable, even though the positions it takes seem questionable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:28, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Of the references which Eastmain has added two are press releases from the foundation, and so are of no value at all in establishing notability. One is about a fund raising dinner for the foundation, and looks more like an advertising piece than an objective report. The one remaining reference given by Eastmain is a report on a campaigning rally, which gives one brief mention of the foundation for educational choice as one of the organisations "sponsoring" the rally. By no stretch of the imagination can these references be considered to be significant coverage in independent sources. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Note Here's another source: http://www.ajc.com/news/study-finds-teacher-pension-462913.html from the AJC. Datavortex (talk) 19:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is a little better than any of the other references given so far. It refers to "research" issued jointly by the foundation and another organisation. However, it is one single news item covering one event, and that event is a publication by a campaigning group of information promoting its point of view. That is what campaigning groups do: we need more than one occasion when they managed to get a news report mentioning one of their publications if we are to establish notability. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 10:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 21:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Try searching without the "The". Abductive  (reasoning) 16:12, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - in my view, one of the indications of notability for research bodies is whether their research is endorsed by reliable sources. The research report, quoted in the ref above, has also been reported by the NYT. TerriersFan (talk) 13:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep. I suppose nobody took my hint: reveals 115 Google News hits about the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice. Yes, that is this organization, and yes, that is Milton Friedman. Also, 30 Google Books hits and even some Google Scholar hits.  Abductive  (reasoning) 05:16, 28 April 2010 (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.