Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coalition to Reduce Spending

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. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 20:34, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Coalition to Reduce Spending

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

Listing for lack of notability. All the references they cite are written by those aassociated with this group, fleeting references, or about fiscal issues generally. I see no in depth coverage on this group and nothing indicating they are having an impact or are somehow noteworthy. UnrepentantTaco (talk) 20:52, 29 May 2013 (UTC) [Edit reverted as per WP:BE and [1]. Unscintillating (talk) 03:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)][reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the sources consist of very fleeting mentions, primary sources, original research, letters to the editors, or their own website. I don't see how this even passes anything close to WP:GNG or WP:ORG. Bearian (talk) 22:24, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Jonathan Bydlak. Subject of this AfD has received passing mention, but mainly in reliable sources that give significant coverage to the organization's president. The subject of the AfD has not received significant coverage, and thus fails WP:ORG. However, although WP:NOTINHERITED applies, the subject is mentioned in relation to its President, who IMHO has received significant coverage from multiple non-primary reliable sources (passing GNG & ANYBIO), as such a small blurb about Bydlak being president of Coalition to Reduce Spending could be added.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 06:32, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There are enough reliable sources independent of the article subject to build a useful encyclopedia article about it. In the current version of the article I see sources cited from LewRockwell.com, National Review, The American Conservative, American Spectator, Gainesville Times, The Hill, Reason, The Fiscal Times, Fox Business, John Stossel, and others. I agree that the article could use some work, but that isn't a valid basis for deleting it. DickClarkMises (talk) 22:35, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 22:54, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Adequate sourcing already showing in the footnotes for a pass of GNG. Carrite (talk) 04:14, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mdann52 (talk) 12:46, 13 June 2013 (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.