Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United American Committee

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. Tone 08:21, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

United American Committee[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)

This was almost certainly an advertisement for the group, created by WP:SPA user:DrdPirate. I have searched for sources to expand this article, specifically in order to make it WP:NPOV (the self-sourced claims of its mission are at odds with the general view that it was an anti-Muslim rabble rousing effort). As it turns out, apart from a few blogs and the press coverage of the one time they tried to generate media controversy, there is nothing at all. There's no substantive coverage of the group, its aims, its ideology or anything else, just a couple of interviews with Petrilla (as far as I can tell the only person associated with the group who has ever been quoted in RS) whihc namecheck this group. It does not seem to have been a 501(c) anything, it rose without trace and disappeared also without trace. Possible redirect to the Orwellian-sounding American Congress for Truth. Guy (Help!) 12:40, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:28, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:28, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:30, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: You do not have to share the organization's mindset to understand its significance. The article is short enough and does not meander on unnecessary stuff that may be branded as propaganda. Deleting it would erase a valid piece of history from our records, expose the limitations of our views, and even make future research on the topic a bit harder (and who knows what else). Besides blogs and plenty of low-quality publications, there are some reliable sources that have mentioned the group (see Books). One captured my attention: Keeping the Promise, published by the highly aclaimed academic press Lang. Caballero/Historiador^⎌ 14:41, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the coverage I can find is not substantive, including the trivial mention in the book mentioned above. In spite of a couple results on Google Books, many in the books in the list are fringe and simply republish a report the group created, and none cover the group substantially. Clear WP:GNG fail. SportingFlyer talk 12:53, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:01, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NORG] (and probably GNG). Very little coverage of this organization out there. Icewhiz (talk) 12:11, 9 October 2018 (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.