Talk:Equal Parenting Alliance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 11 May 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

[edit] I notice...

I notice that this article is under consideration for deletion. This would be a great shame as the EPA in itself stands as one facet of the Equal Parenting movement. Other organisations represented on Wikipedia that fall within the same movement, such as Fathers 4 Justice and Families Need Fathers are given good coverage yet only represent, individually, one arm of the movement, namely protest and support (although both said organisation lobby Government for change).

The Equal Parenting Alliance stands as a legitimate political party within the UK, working to raise the public’s awareness to the plight of our nation’s forgotten children- those who remain neither remembered nor acknowledged by the Family Courts and Government agencies such as CAFCASS who would consign them without defence to a life of neglect or abuse. The Equal Parenting Alliance hopes to convince via political argument that the system of Family Law needs changing for the better, and represents a coherent argument in the issue that was raised by the angry disenfranchised dads of F4J.

Wikipedia, and all similar media, should recognise that the Equal Parenting movement needs to be allowed to speak in all its forums; to greater increase the power of its voice in the fight against state sanctioned child abuse.

Philelse (talk) 06:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I think this article clearly shows notability for organisations as the party is registered in the UK register of political parties and there is a link to this. There are also links to interviews and articles with the BBC and local and national newspapers. Election results are shown referenced in official publications. It is also notable as the only political party in the UK actively putting up candidates whose major remit is reform of family law. Steveepa (talk) 09:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I also wonder if the problem is that the people who look too see if an article has 'sources' only look at the 'references' section. This would ne understandable if they have little knowledge of the subject and are simply looking for what they see as verifiable references. This article references several reliable sources but they are mostly just hyperlinked in. The reason this was done was because I couldn't work out how to do the references with links and thought simple hyperlinks offered more to the reader. I will try and change them to the standard references. Steveepa (talk) 21:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)