Deletion of Fringe science organizations

Comment: I don't agree that it's inherently OR to characterize organizations that are widely acknowledged to be outside of the mainstream as fringe, and I don't think the word is necessarily pejorative either. Don't agree there are no sources to verify these organizations as fringe. Here's an article in LiveScience (eliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_65#Is_LiveScience.com_a_reliable_source.3F|previously identified as a reliable source) that refers to it as "fringe": http://www.livescience.com/24310-flat-earth-belief.html. An article in the BBC characterizes them as "conspiratorial", which is synonymous with fringe in this instance: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7540427.stm. Without going through the rest, I'm guessing other organizations have similar articles on them. However, this page lends itself much more to a list rather than an article, since that would require synthesis
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Redirect (WP:R)

Comment: to List of fringe science organizations and '''delete''' ''all entries that do not have articles''. General consensus seems to be that items in this type of list ''a):'' be notable enough to have an article, and, ''b):'' have a well developed "criticism" section in that article supporting the claim of "fringe". We are looking at a resultant list of two entries right now (three if "Natural Philosophy Alliance" gets spun back out) (and more can be created from these list entries) but anything short of that falls into 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:LABEL)

Comment: to List of fringe science organizations and remove any that fail , per {{u|VQuakr}}, above. Thanks for the good idea. Good luck, &mdash
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: According to which independent sources they are fringe science organizations? None? The title is . I could not find any reliable sources to indicate they are fringe science organizations. This is a pure  topic. If we remove any that fail  and  policy the page could be blanked. An independent source must show for each entry it is fringe. That's not what is being done here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:SYN||WP:RS||WP:V)

Comment: There is no doubt that these organizations exist.  It only took me a few minutes, for example, to find several articles in major newspapers (The Guardian, New York Times) about the Flat Earth Society.  The problem is not that the organizations aren't notable, it's that finding  supporting the categorization as ''fringe'' is not easy.  Such  sources do exist, but the effort needs to be put into finding them and being careful to not say more here than is supported by the sources.  For example, I found a http://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1979/02/26/111076648.html?pageNumber=14 New York Times article about the Flat Earth Society.  It says
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)