Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Universism (3rd 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 of the debate was Recreation of multiply-deleted content User:Zoe|^(talk) 03:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Universism

Several articles have already been created on this subject; several of them have been deleted by the VfD/AfD process, and others have been deleted by speedy deletion as substantial re-creations of previously deleted material. This article contains much of the same text as previous versions; however, the actual reason that the article was nominated for deletion in almost every previous VfD/AfD is a lack of evidence of notability. The article now contains more evidence of notability than previous versions did; in the view of several editors, this is a reason to decide the fate of the article by AfD, rather than speedy deletion.

• Keep and cleanup. The article still references a "story" in the New York Times about Universism that was an op-ed piece and not, as Universism's promoters would claim, a "feature" on Universism; however, they have had a front-page story (a story, this time, not an op-ed piece) in the LA Times. I think the bar of notability has finally been reached. -- Antaeus Feldspar 03:34, 21 February 2006 (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.