Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Disclosure Project

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. The delete argument was that the article fails WP:CORP, which is refuted by the article having multiple (two) reliable publications having written about the organisation. The opinions to delete did not strongly support the deletion argument, and are overwhelmed by the opinions to keep. Kevin (talk) 06:41, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Disclosure Project

Fails WP:CORP. Not a notable organization. ScienceApologist (talk) 02:10, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete The BBC report viewed this group with skepticism which does not establish its notability. More reliable sources would be preferred. Artene50 (talk) 04:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - What with the risks to Gary McKinnon right now it's imperative this article be kept. Absolutely imperative. In fact I suggest it might be 'powers that be' that are trying to hush up this whole affair - and that is simply WRONG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.201.30.110 (talk • contribs) 08:27, August 3, 2008
Merge into Steven M. Greer. There's probably not enough here for a stand-alone article but it's sourced and relevant to him. Reyk _YO! 04:34, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - In the public domain. Has a National Press Club source. Strong Google tree [[1]] WP:N Vufors (talk) 10:10, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge to Steven M. Greer Timneu22 (talk) 12:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - NPC source, membership includes notable persons. There was a lot more info here before it was cut down. Perhaps more could be added to justify its existence as a stand-alone article. snake666 —Preceding undated comment was added at 18:44, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect to Steven M. Greer. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The 'strongest' reasons to delete are pretty weak. The fact that the BBC was skeptical is maybe more reason to keep than delete! - DannyMuse (talk) 07:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Whats the problem with the person nominating this? P.S. This is an Australian page, looked after by the Australian editors, how would this U.S. nominator have any idea about the project unless he read it on wiki. 124.180.23.63 (talk) 07:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/merge to Steven M. Greer Colonel Warden (talk) 09:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge (to Steven M. Greer). The caveat on 'merge' is that little of the information in the article appears to be sourcable to the citations -- which appear to be dismissive of the group and cover mainly contrary opinions in the underlying 'controversy' (leaving the group's notability highly questionable). Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 11:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Steven M. Greer with rigorous attention to WP:RS. - Eldereft (cont.) 01:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect that which is supported by WP:RS sources to Steven M. Greer, per Eldereft. Pete.Hurd (talk) 03:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, Merge/Redirect to Steven M. Greer per Eldereft (and others). Shot info (talk) 05:13, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --Troodon (talk) 08:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep 5 August 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.38.145.230 (talk) 11:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep marginaly notable. CENSEI (talk) 23:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge to Steven M. Greer, or redirect to a sister wiki--bugmee, 7:27 EST, 8 August 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.255.199.12 (talk) 11:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Vufors Coachuponnow (talk) 01:39, 9 August 2008 (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.