Deletion of Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies

Comment: What a weird discussion this is. Wikipedia has very low standards for what it includes and as best I can tell, no one here has acknowledged those rules and tried to meet them. A lot of people are saying to keep this article. I encourage everyone who wants this article kept to say nothing more at all and instead post 2-3 citations to |reliable sources which feature this organization as its subject. This is the most common standard by means of which deletion is judged. I regret that so many people have come here to make strange proposals for keeping this which are unrelated to Wikipedia's rules. This is not complicated - 2-3 URLs shared here constitute a complete argument for keeping this article. {{u|Waters.Justin}} - you came close because you shared links, which is more than what others are doing. Do you understand the criticism that the links you shared do not feature this organization as their subject
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: How is this even a question? The |Holy Grail states: '''"extensive coverage in independent and reliable sources"'''. Does IEET count with such sources? A resounding NO! All sources are either associated with it, or are passing mentions within articles about or written by any of the founders. It's very simple: fail General Notability and you can't be on Wikipedia. I don't see why this is turning out to be so tediously controversial. Cheers
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: You're absolutely right that many articles violate  by including a "notable members" section. Without reliable sources that those members actually did something of note for the organization involved, all that stuff needs to be deleted. Remember that |we have no deadline, which is why |this stuff sometimes stays around. But if that were an argument to lower our standards, we would end up with accepting the worst article on WP as the standard used to measure all others... Finally, you above "keep" !vote does not contain a single policy-based argument, meaning that the closing admin will most likely ignore it completely. If you want your voice to count, you should base your arguments on  or , instead of aspersions about peoples' motivation
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTADIRECTORY||WP:DEADLINE||WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS||WP:GNG||WP:ORG)

Comment: No evidence this meets GNG or ORG. In the (rather unlikely) event that evidence of notability would be found,  certainly applies
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: I concur with {{u|Bluerasberry}}, if all you keep !voters can just find two reliable, independent sources about IEET, I will change my position to keep. Until then I remain unconvinced that this passes 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)