Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Discover the Networks
Justified for Wikipedia NPOV in any case. Following Jersey Devil's link I see the Alexa of SourceWatch is 42k and MediaMatters only 12k.  And, Alf photoman, David Horowitz Freedom Center was redlinked because it was misspelled, not because it was not notable. This article is a stub and has an anti-Horowitz POV currently, but keep it for others to work on. Incidentally, it doesn't need renaming, since Horowitz renamed it from Network to Networks some time back (it seems both names work as urls). And I notice that adds ANOTHER 1,563k to the Alexa. And here's another left near counterpart with a Wiki entry, MediaTransparency, more used than the other two, but still with only about a quarter of DTN's combined Alexa. By the way, the non-trivial coverage of DTN required by  doesn't have to be favorable. All the accusations of guilt-by-association count. ("Web-specific content is notable if...The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself.") And, no it's not all FrontPageMag reprints. Looking at Google and backing out a reference I found, e.g., http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1838. I dunno what proportion came from Horowitz's other enterprises -- do you?{{fact}} If you claim , give an example. If , be more specific. Sounds to me like "Fog in Channel, Continent Isolated
— User:Andyvphil, 09:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:N||WP:V||WP:FRINGE (Wikipedia:Notability)