Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Choose-Life.Org

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 of the debate was no consensus to delete; editorial decision taken to move page to Choose Life Inc. Johnleemk | Talk 09:11, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Choose-Life.Org

This page was proposed for speedy deletion. I removed speedy tag as I think it is clearly not a speedy, but I can see the proposer's point -- it's largely, but not completely, advertising, even though I think the organization itself is notable enough. Neutral. --Nlu 20:29, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

• Merge with Russ Amerling, which however is also marked for deletion. JoJan 20:40, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. The organization's website is very low in traffic rankings (4,740,182, to be exact - proposed WP:WEB guidelines recommend a ranking of 10,000 or below), and to my knowledge has had very little press coverage. Appears to me to be a fairly non-notable organization. --bbatsell | « give me a ring » 21:20, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Comment This seems to be part of a larger national movement and therefore notable--maybe not notable enough to have its own page, but can't we find some other page to merge it into? (preferably not an afd). And its status as a non-profit argues against the claim that it's simply advertising. I think this article just needs to be cleaned up (which I already started after finding this article last night... it had some definite POV issues) and properly categorized. I don't like the moral/ political stance very much, but that's no reason to delete something.--Hraefen 22:35, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. It amounts to political advertising, which I oppose as policy whether or not I like the politics. I'd delete an equally insignificant abortion rights group. Durova 22:45, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Keep This is a real movement going on in at least 8 states (I'll return with data) and the license plate fee arrangement had to pass through the Florida state legislature (I think this is true of other states...I'll find out). That alone should be enough to be considered notable.--Hraefen 23:18, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

• Illinois Choose Life Inc. is currently collecting signatures in an effort to get the license plates in their state. http://www.ilchoose-life.org/
• comment (this is all from the link provided below-2003) Virginia the same legislation as in Florida in 2003. The Iowa state Senate introduced a bill this week that would do the same. The ACLU has threatened to sue if the Virginia measure is signed into law, which will produce the ninth lawsuit over this issue in three years. Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and South Carolina already have "Choose Life" license plate programs, and 13 other states are considering enacting similar legislation. http://www.slate.com/id/2078247/
• If the ACLU is paying attention…I think it’s notable enough for wikipedians.--Hraefen 23:30, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
• Link showing Louisiana State Representative Shirley Bowler holding one of the license plates.--Hraefen 05:07, 26 November 2005 (UTC) (http://clarionherald.org/20021120/art005.htm)

Name change

• This article was poorly named to start with. The article should have been named Choose Life Inc. as this is the organization behind the website. This name change would definitely make the average user less likely to think that this is unscrupulous self-promotion. Just to reiterate- I don't agree with this organization's principles, but I do think it is notable.--Hraefen 23:18, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
• Move per Hraefen. Stifle 01:53, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Is that an implicit keep and then move? --Nlu 03:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete a lot of laws are passed every year in a lot of states, that doesn't make the effort to get them passed notable except maybe a small mention as part of a larger movement. If it's not already there, this might deserve a mention on Pro Life or Anti-abortion movement Peyna 05:23, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

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.