Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/People Can Change
Gosh, I think we need to be really careful that our own |POV's aren't showing here, folks.  "Pushing a homophobic agenda" is a strong accusation, WebHamster. I read the article.  It is definitely a smaller organization, but WP:ORG is okay with that if there are RS's.  WP:SPAM doesn't apply here either - it documents both the creation of the organization as well as criticisms of their impossibly controversial reason for being, but at least the article is attempting to be neutral.  I don't see any attempt at a "homophobic agenda" in the article, or in the actual organization's website, for that matter.  They seem to only want to "help" those that "want help".  That doesn't mean "homophobic" any more than me saying I want "help" for anything else I don't like about myself.  "Homophobic" groups definitely exist and should be run into the ground, but I don't see this group carrying around "God hates Fags" banners. (Please excuse my language, used only for emphasis here.)  The criticisms and missions of the organization are in the article, and from what I can tell, use reliable sources.  I say, clean up the sources, removing the numerous "people can change"  dotcom sources into a single "external link" www.peoplecanchange.com.  The others:  DesertNews is reliable/independent; gives both sides of argument and documents notability of PCC.  LifeSite.net seems neutral, independent also.  BoxTurtleBulletin, ironically, seems very POV, is completely against this organization, but is included here - IMO as an effort to show NPOV.    Again, PCC is a small organization, there aren't a lot of GHits.  But WP:ORG says that doesn't necessarily mean NN.  We don't want an encyclopedia that only has large, commercial organizations, do we
— User:Keeper76, 17:58, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:POV (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view)