Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Savior's Alliance for Lifting the Truth


 * 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. Sources from 1990s and more recently indicate enduring notability. RL0919 (talk) 01:03, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

The Savior's Alliance for Lifting the Truth

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:ORG, WP:RECENT and WP:PLOT ("Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events")) - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 15:42, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: Notable in 1996, and notability is not temporary. I realize this became a big thing in the news during the Christine O'Donnell senate campaign, but I dug into the history a bit myself and saw it had coverage then and now.--Milowent • talkblp-r  16:42, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * What's the basis for your premise that it was (or would have been) notable in 1996? - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 16:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I just added two newspaper cites from 1997 to the article for a start. It was also profiled by MTV in 1996.--Milowent • talkblp-r  17:33, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * So far as I can see, it received trivial coverage in the nineties, so I don't accept it was notable then, and I don't see it as having become any more so because a former director is now a failed candidate for political office in a recent election. - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 21:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Sufficient coverage to meet the notability guideline with the best coverage actually from over a decade ago - the first Washington Times article especially is definitely significant coverage, I have added a little from it, but there is more about the aims and methods of the organisation. Davewild (talk) 18:08, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - I should say I created this article, so obviously I thought the organization was notable. However, I want to add to this discussion by saying there were facts I came across in my research about the SALT that I didn't have time to add - for example, it was a much larger youth ministry organization than one would guess by it name only, it had at least four branches, it was in existence for many years and it may still be in existence.. The basic Google search that the deletion nominator did may not do it justice. KeptSouth (talk) 20:12, 29 December 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.