Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boston Alliance Against Registration and the Draft

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. Courcelles 01:08, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Boston Alliance Against Registration and the Draft

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Possibly does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). I do believe it met the standards for WP:CSD#A7, so I declined that speedy and am bringing the article to AfD for discussion. NW (Talk) 03:20, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 03:45, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 03:45, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As the orignal creator of this article, and an active particpant in BAARD (with my wife) 1980-1990, I know the history of its activism on the local level. Citations in media can be found; personal archives; documents; special archives, etc. BAARD did much media outreach during its time. Unfortunately,the article (as it is now) has been edited and dumbed-down user:Episteme67 —Preceding undated comment added 16:23, 16 August 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Keep Repeated contemporary coverage available online in the Boston Globe, as well as the Christian Science Monitor, the Bangor Daily News and The Nation. As this group was active over 30 years ago, before the web, there is a strong presumption that other reliable sources exist, especially in alternative publications, which have not yet been digitized and indexed by Google. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:24, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Relatively local, but it appeared influential in the area. Briefly mentioned in one book on Boston-area activism and its material is part of a Brown University collection. There may be other unindexed references. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 06:36, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~Comment~~; 45 news hits, some significant; 5 mentions in books with none of them appearing to be significant. Although I have seen some AfDs pass with only one or two significant coverage articles in nationally major reliable sources (the Boston Globe considered by some as one of them), I have also seen other AfDs fail with the same number of significant reliable sources; therefore, I will not support or oppose this AfD at this time, and reserve my right to oppose or support at some later date and time.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 10:01, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Changing my opinion to Weak Delete, although there maybe significant stories in the subject's local paper (all be it by some opinions a major national paper), the total sum of them don't convince me that it is notable outside of its local area. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:48, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per previous statements of notability and its having some references. I copyedited the article and hid undocumented lists of similar organizations and leaders. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:37, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The most shocking thing here is that Committee Against Registration and the Draft is showing as a redlink. That's a big "miss" for the encyclopedia. I'm generally in favor of retaining content relating to politics, of retaining non-promotional content retaining to non-profit organizations, and of retaining content of potential interest to historians, so you know where I'm leaning. I'll revisit this for sources when I have more time. Almost certain to be the source of independent media coverage, I would imagine. Carrite (talk) 11:23, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The draft is gone, but if it is ever forgotten, plenty of people who would fight to the last drop of your blood will be more than happy to bring it back. Think of the terrific crusades we could have then! Similarly, Committee Against Registration and the Draft and anything else about the departure of the American Empire deserves preservation. I'm not to the point of writing new articles myself, but no shortage exists of people who can do it. Ornithikos (talk) 01:53, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - There needs to be a page on CARD. Once that's up, a case for merger might be made. This is a huge omission at WP and it will absolutely be corrected in time. Carrite (talk) 02:18, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops, I forgot to mention the notability aspect. Cullen has it right above, as usual. Adequate independent third-party sources exist. Carrite (talk) 02:19, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.