Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liberty Scotland (Campaign and Pressure Group)

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. Icewedge (talk) 02:46, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Liberty Scotland (Campaign and Pressure Group)[edit]

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

The creator removed the advertising style and the prod, but regardless this fringe organisation is still not notable as a quick glace at its Web site news page will indicate http://www.liberty-scotland.org/LS-News.html Ajbpearce (talk) 20:13, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete New organisation attempting to use Wikipedia to establish its presence. No pre-existing notability demonstrated or visible by web search. AllyD (talk) 21:00, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:49, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:49, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. What AllyD said. Can't remember seeing a mention of this groupuscule in The Herald or The Scotsman and this Google news search tends to support my vague recollections. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article reports the creation of a new (fringe or fledgling) organisation and conforms to all of Wikipedia standards (it is a new organisation and the fact of there being no sources, except the organisation's own web page, self verifies). I am the creator of the entry and Liberty Scotland and we are very actively promoting and campaigning and hopefully that will become apparent. At the moment it is a new organisation and that is what is being reported - therefore, keep. Thanks for your time and consideration of this. Tlmglasgow (talk) 08:31, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Tlmglasgow, I'm afraid you've strengthened the case for deletion. Start by reading WP:NOTSOAPBOX. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 10:44, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for self-promotion, soapboxing, and not being notable. -- Whpq (talk) 17:05, 10 March 2010 (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.