Deletion of Tea party (protest)

Comment: The article passes , but I agree it should be revisited in the near future to determine if this has lasting significance or was just a trendy publicity stunt
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: There appears to be enough independent press coverage to meet . I've read and reread #NEWS, and I see nothing specific in that very vague policy that supports a delete here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:notability)

Comment: A scrabble of small-town news outlets doesn't quite measure up to |notability guidelines.  Also a bit of  and OT#NEWS.  At best, it warrants a brief mention in an article appropriate, perhaps Subprime mortgage crisis
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RECENTISM||WP:NOT)

Comment: to Homeowners Affordability and Stability Plan.  This shouldn't be a separate article because of #NEWS, but it shouldn't be deleted entirely because it's a sin against the basic purpose of writing an encyclopaedia to remove well-sourced information.— The article as written is much too long.  It should be a short sub-section in Homeowners Affordability and Stability Plan per 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:DUE)

Comment: I agree with Atmoz, it fails Fails #NEWS. If it survives it probably needs to be globalised. The phenomena extends beyond America. Tea Parties have been used as a form of protest in other countries pre-dating the list of protests in the article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: this series of events shows no evidence of being of any historical significance. Fails #NEWS
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)