Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Americans for Prosperity
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 --JForget 00:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Americans for Prosperity[edit]
- Americans for Prosperity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Self-sourced article on a political pressure group. Guy (Help!) 18:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment No vote just yet, but it certainly sounds like they'd be notable if the claims in the article could be reliably sourced. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, they're all over Google News Archive thus sourceable. They're relatively new so don't have the name recognition of e.g. the Club for Growth, but they are out there on things like TABOR at the national and state level. --Dhartung | Talk 21:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Pastordavid (talk) 21:36, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Per Dhartung, I think it is a notable orginization, and also gets many hits on Google news. STORMTRACKER 94 21:40, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- keep I may not like them, but notable. Hobit (talk) 08:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Very weak keep. With branches in 20+ US states, they have (albeit relatively new) clout and certainly are a "player" in the US political scene. (If the assertions in the article are true - that's a lot of prez candidates to show up for any debate). Seem notable, but I'd love to see sources that verifiably tell us about them (not just press releases and the org's homepage.). I'm looking now... Keeper | 76 21:47, 17 December 2007 (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.