Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open Europe (second nomination)
- 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. The rewrite at User:Sceptic/Open Europe draft can be assessed on the Talk page and replace the main article if required. (aeropagitica) (talk) 14:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A DRV consensus concluded that this content, previously a G4 speedy, was different from that previously AfD-ed here. It is listed at AfD for fresh consideration. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 14:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep This is still mostly an ad (and I'm considering throwing the "Read our stuff here!" sections out wholesale), but a NewsBank search shows they are frequently cited as experts in top tier newspapers. ~ trialsanderrors 19:00, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]- Change to Weak delete per Red King. This needs to be cleaned up to meet WP:NPOV. I might change back if the article presents the group in a neutral light before the end of the AfD. ~ trialsanderrors 23:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete since it is a big improvement on the Party Political Broadcast that was here before. At least it is now amenable to edit. Last time, I tried inserting "they say that" in vain attempt to achieve NPOV before deciding that it was a hopeless case and nominating for afd. The comments then were even less charitable.
But it does open the door to every lobby group to push up their Google rating by being listed on Wikipedia and that is why I vote to delete. If we agree to this, how do we justify refusing anything else? Catholic Mothers for a New Holy Roman Empire, anyone? --Red King 20:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply] - Keep - it's been improved hugely and it is a very prominent group in the UK. --Alexuk 17:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - it is listed by the Guardian as one of the UK's leading think tanks [1]. I will have a go at NPOVing it. Sceptic 17:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - There seem to be two different issues in play here - (a) whether the page is incapable of being reformed to be NPOV and (b) whether Open Europe is a notable enough group to include to avoid the Catholic Mothers for a New Holy Roman Empire issue. On (a) I agree it badly needs a critical section and general conversion to NPOV, but I don't think it's irredemable. On (b) I think it it passes the notability test. On a two second google search I found that the OE site is being archived by the British Library [2] as part of a project archiving a fairly small number of UK politics sites, which is, I guess, a pretty good claim to some sort of fame. --Monalisaoverdrive 22:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- For info - I have placed a draft re-write at User:Sceptic/Open Europe draft. Any thoughts? Sceptic 13:02, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks much more balanced. I have added some criticisms of the group that I found on the web. I think this page should now replace the old one. --Paul Stephenson 15:32, 25 August 2006 (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.