Deletion of Fluoride Action Network

Comment: I say they pass, clearly, . Are mentions on other anti-fluoridation sites unnotable because anti-fluoridation is just dumb in your view?    Diversifying sources is better than deleting articles. Will you next want to AfD Water fluoridation controversy itself? An exercise: name an organization dedicated to opposing fluoridation  ''more notable'' than FAN, or does opposing water fluoridation consign one ''ipso facto'' to a deserved obscurity? I'm daring to examine motives here (ordinarily somewhat rude) not because I doubt that you sincerely want to improve the encyclopedia, but because I see zero concern for how properly to represent the topic of opposition to water fluoridation
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Are mentions on other anti-fluoridation sites unnotable because anti-fluoridation is just dumb in your view? ''" Its not my view. Notability is not importance, "'''''mentions on other anti-fluoridation sites'''''" or popularity... Notability is based on Wikipedias content policies and they apply to ''all articles''. Wikipedia requires the existence of Wikipedia:Reliable sources|"reliable", Wikipedia:Independent sources|"third-party" or "independent sources" so that we can be confident that we're not passing along random gossip, perpetuating hoaxes, or posting |indiscriminate collections of information. Wikipedia requires that all articles rely primarily on Wikipedia:Independent sources|"third-party" or "independent sources" so that we can write a fair and balanced article that complies with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and that articles are |not advertising an organization. ''Fluoride Action Network'' does not meet this criteria and clearly fails Wikipedias |inclusion guidelines. Also, attributing motives to fellow editors ''is'' inappropriate
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:IINFO||WP:NOTADVERTISING||WP:GNG)

Comment: I see your point about notability transcending mere popularity: Wikipedia should only document, not raise a subject's profile.  You have not, however, answered the important question, '''''Is there  an organization dedicated to opposing fluoridation more notable than FAN, or does opposing water fluoridation consign one ipso facto to a deserved obscurity?'''''.  If you can think of no more notable organization, it begs the question of whether you think the ''topic'' is even notable, a reasonable question, rhetorically.  Also, you keep saying that FAN is not , but have not substantiated this beyond saying that all who do take note of them are irrelevant.   I am not assigning you motives, but I am struggling to see any ''evidence'' of what you are saying. When you imply that having an article on FAN amounts to, ''passing along random gossip, perpetuating hoaxes, or posting |indiscriminate collections of information.'', it is difficult not to see a reliance, here and elsewhere, upon a working assumption that ''anti-fluoridation is just dumb
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:IINFO)

Comment: A simple Google search of ''https://www.google.com/search?q=water+fluoridation+controversy water fluoridation controversy'' shows how many other anti-fluoridation sites make reference to FAN. FAN is clearly , and calling it Y does not detract from its notability.  Further, it is not fringey in the sense that it is at the center of anti-fluoridation thinking, and the repeated failure at the polls of pro-fluoridation measures show this thinking to be itself quite notable.  The article does have more primary sources than strictly necessary, but they are cited in press with reasonable frequency.  The characterization ''mom and pop'' is similarly irrelevant and pointlessly pejorative: many organizations achieve significance with small staff, some of whom may be family.  Finally, the antisocial behavior of some proponents should not enter into '''''deletion of a topic''''', but should instead provoke an honest examination of why the behavior is happening at all
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:FRINGE)