Deletion of Fight the Pipe (2nd nomination)

Comment: Article is well sourced from references from the BBC. Meets  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RS)

Comment: Do you see those refs at the bottom of the page? They assert notability. And yes, it actually does satisfy #Non-commercial organizations, as "the scope of their activities is national or international in scale." (they're a protest organization against for importing oil... importing = international... seeing a connection
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)

Comment: Although protests against the pipe are well covered in the references, none of them actually mention an organisation by the name of 'Fight the Pipe' (a couple of protest groups - 'Rising Tide' and 'Safe Haven Network' - are in fact mentioned in some references, but not 'Stop the Pipe'). The subject thus fails  because there is a lack of significant coverage ''about the organisation itself'' in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. I am making the distinction here between the generic protests, which may be notable, and the organisation, which is not. The 'Fight the Pipe' website, which is linked in the article, is a blog and thus is both a primary source and not a reliable source. Since there are no reliable sources (I find no news coverage of an organisation called 'Fight the Pipe'http://news.google.co.uk/news?q=%22Fight%20the%20pipe%22&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn), the subject also fails one of our core policies, that of being |verifiable in a reliable source. No objection to the generic protests being covered in Wikipedia as these seem to be notable; actually, I see that they are covered in South Wales Gas Pipeline
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:V)