Deletion of Fellowship of Reason

Comment: Hi Mlcowen.  You may be new to this aspect of Wikipedia.  You need to understand that ''notability'' is a Wikipedia term of art &mdash; it does not necessarily mean the same thing here as it does in ordinary English.  See RL0919's link to  for more details, but the summary is that a topic, to be "notable" in the specific sense important here, needs to have been covered by "multiple independent reliable secondary sources", where again you need to understand the Wikipedia meanings of |reliable source and |secondary source.  Sorry if it's all a bit lawyer-like, but that's the culture that has evolved, for better or for worse.  That doesn't mean your group is ''not'' notable, just that you need to understand what it means before you can debate it effectively
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RS||WP:SECONDARY)

Comment: Perhaps "notability" is a less than ideal term, but it is the one in use.  If it makes understanding easier, an alternative way to look at this is that the organisation does not meet |Wikipedia's inclusion criteria
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: into Ethical movement.  It is neither notable, nor unique, despite the article's |unverified claims
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)