Deletion of UW Phases

Comment: Let me say first that I admire your fervor in defending this article, but what works as a 2L or 3L will not work here, nor is it relevant or material to this process.  In Wikipedia, notability is a standard that is very simple to follow and it can be found at .  Notability is shown through |verifiable, |reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article.  Of the 12 references listed, only 1 of them mentions the group, and it is a blog.  Blogs are not normally reliable sources for Wikipedia.  Sources do not have to be web sources, but they must be able to be verified.  Print media is a reliable source, although student newspapers are not normally included in that category
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTABILITY||WP:V||WP:RS)

Comment: With respects to the discussion up above, and while myself quite willing to congratulate and admire the entrepreneurship of the "select few law students from the class of 2011 at the University of Wyoming School of Law" who have created an "entertainment group" and its set of "edutainment videos", the inclusion criteria at , , and  have not yet been met.  Sorry guys
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:CORP||WP:GNG)

Comment: The article is well referenced, but there is no assertion or evidence of notability relating to any of the criteria at . A Google search for their name (quoted so as to only include results with both words side by side) http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22UW+Phases%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= reveals 4 pages of results, none of which (other than this page and the actual article) are related to the subject. One would think that any "entertainment" group in the 21st century would have at least one instance of |reliable, non-trivial third party media coverage to establish notability (again see 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORG||WP:RS||WP:ORG)

Comment: those of you who like "playing lawyer" might want to read the relevant policies first. For example, wp:n|notability has to be established by third party sources, there is no presumption of notability (quite the opposite in practice). Further, entries are judged on their own merits, not wp:otherstuffexists|in comparison to existing entries.  is pretty important too, as is . Cheers
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:RS)

Comment: Most of the "sources" used as "references" in this article do not even mention this group or their videos, thus making them completely useless for citation purposes. As an example, the article claims that Kathie Lee Gifford's granddaughter Jessica Gifford appears in one of the group's videos, and cites this to Jessica Gifford's web site. The problem is that (a) Jessica Gifford's web site doesn't mention her being in any of these videos, (b) Jessica Gifford's web site doesn't mention her being related to Kathie Lee Gifford at all, and (c) Kathie Lee Gifford has no grandchildren; in fact, Jessica would be older than either of Kathie Lee's children. (If they meant that Jessica is Frank Gifford's granddaughter, well, the source still doesn't say that either, nor that Jessica was in the video in the first place.) Of the sources that do mention this group or its videos, none are |reliable independent sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)