Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Illinois Voices for Reform

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:15, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Illinois Voices for Reform[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

There are no independent reliable sources to be found about this group. Current sources are dead links or pages that quote one member in passing. I do not believe any independent reliable sigcov exists for this group How I could just edit a wiki article (talk) 05:17, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Law. How I could just edit a wiki article (talk) 05:17, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Kpg jhp jm 06:04, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 06:16, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep They have a ProPublica listing, and seem to have been discussed in several news articles...but those articles don't focus on the group itself, rather an event or a bill they're supporting or opposing. I could go either way on whether that is WP:SIGCOV. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 15:45, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Did you find any articles that didn't just quote this defunct groups single member? How I could just edit a wiki article (talk) 05:43, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I added an article from In These Times[1] with some in-depth coverage of them. This[2] is also somewhat in-depth. The group is still active and gets discussed in scholarly articles, but those are either passing mentions or citations to their website.

Note that shortly before the AfD[3] this article was greatly reduced in size and sourcing by a pair of now-blocked (sock?) accounts who appear to have had a modus operandi of removing text and sourcing from articles dealing with this subject area, then bringing AfD nominations. One of those accounts is the @How I could just edit a wiki article. Some of the removed sources like a St. Louis Post Dispatch article aren't available online. I haven't seen them, so I didn't add them back.

As it stands now sourcing for the article is OK. Notability sourcing is, in my opinion, barely adequate. And if not then WP:IAR due to the shenanigans around this nomination and the recent edit history. Oblivy (talk) 03:36, 9 August 2023 (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.