- 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. MBisanz talk 01:50, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- CAIR Watch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
A completely non-notable blog that seems to simply collect content from other sites like MilitantIslamMonitor.org, Jihad Watch and FrontPage Magazine when the content is critical of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Nothing in the entry established notability - WP:N. Wikipedia is not a blog nor does it exist to be the mouthpiece of blogs - WP:NOT. An alternative to deletion might be merging one or two sentences of content into Criticism of the Council on American-Islamic Relations PelleSmith (talk) 15:03, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep. There are articles in the NY Times, Broward-Palm Beach New Times, Canada Free Press, etc. They got a US Senator to recind an award given - This is almost never done. This is very notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lansing3456 (talk • contribs) 15:27, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that Lansing3456 was the article's only significant contributor and that has been blocked for sockpuppetry. Oren0 (talk) 03:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The award was rescinded because several conservative websites objected, there is no evidence that CAIR watch did it on their own.
Can you cite what the NY Times article says? I can't find it.Sorry, found it. It isn't an article about CAIR watch, it's about Boxer rescinding the award. It has 2 sentences about Kaufman, one of which simply mentions CAIR watch. Doug Weller (talk) 18:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. —PelleSmith (talk) 15:30, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. —PelleSmith (talk) 15:30, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Despite a handful of mentions in reliable sources, i cannot find anything that could be said to "address the subject directly in detail", a requirement for notability. Also seems like a coatrack to promote the views of the group rather than being about the group itself. --neon white talk 18:47, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Just a promotional article for a fringe hate group. Carol Moore 18:59, 21 October 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc
- Delete insufficient mainstream media coverage. -- Nudve (talk) 19:53, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: fails WP:N Oren0 (talk) 03:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per the nomination. Seems clear-cut to me. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:59, 22 October 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.