Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians

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 - notable, per WP:HEY. But not my cuppa tea. Bearian (talk) 18:06, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians[edit]

A small pressure group, Google shows some passing mentions (which matches the passing mentions used as sources) but this does not appear to have been the primary subject of coverage in reliable independent sources - most of the (few) sources which do exist out there are very unreliable. Guy (Help!) 23:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

seems notable^MY♥_INchile 23:09, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If what the article says is true they are notable enough. Being a "pressure group", no matter how wildly "politically incorrect", is not a reason to delete. Steve Dufour (talk) 01:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't say it was. I said the lack of non-trivial independent sources was the reason to delete. Guy (Help!) 07:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable organization has received coverage in Village Voice, elsewhere. DickClarkMises (talk) 02:31, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please add the non-trivial coverage to the article. Guy (Help!) 07:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the following sources to the ext. links section for later development of the article, which could certainly stand to be improved. I'm just not interested enough to do the improving. I am interested enough to argue that the organization is notable enough to have been covered non-trivially in independent sources. DickClarkMises (talk) 08:24, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-Life Gay, Lesbian Group: Homosexual Orgs Shouldn't Be Pro-Abortion, Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com, 9 June 2006.
The Outsiders: A new breed of campus activists are trying to drag the pro-life cause away from the religious right, Jason Gay, Boston Phoenix, 30 November 1998.

Keep Coverage from 1994 Washington Times to 2003 Post-Gazette.--T. Anthony (talk) 09:22, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (EDIT CONFLICT) External links aren't all of the best quality, but there is enough to demonstrate notability. There are also quite a few relevant hits on g-news, g-books, and g-scholar. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 09:24, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete No references, no notable sources. This sounds more like an affinity group of gay and lesbian neighbors who also happen to be pro-life. How do I know it even ezists? --It keeps letting me down (talk) 10:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)— It keeps letting me down (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep I think the sources are sufficient enough, since this tag was added more sourced have been put up. - Schrandit (talk) 12:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article establishes notability. --Ave Caesar (talk) 12:31, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:14, 2 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.