Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lake Ontario Waterkeeper
per the below discussion about sources. '''Delete''' pending better sources. Sorry but I have to agree with Chunky Rice here. All you got so far is a promotional description of the people and things this organization has been involved in. Slap a phone number on that and we should be charging for the hosting costs ;). What you need is more ''secondary reliable sources'' per  and . Once you got those  will also be fulfilled at the same time. If people would focus more on  notability would be far far less of an issue in deletion discussions. Here is a hint: The organization is a ''primary source''. We do not rely on ''primary sources'' except in rare cases of more of less trivial information that just needs attribution. Read up on the difference between primary and secondary sources and thjen return top  and understand why ''the criteria for inclusion is verifiability, not truth
— User:EconomicsGuy, 08:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:V||WP:N||WP:V||WP:V (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)