Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MindFreedom International
for the reasons I have argued in my rebuttals to MastCell.  Generally: (1) multiple  friendly sources exist.  (2)  is met by multiple non-trivial independent journalistic sources.  (3) Many, many, references of some nature exist, per google test (42,500 results) and various national news outlets.  While this isn't strong evidence, it only further strengthens points 1 and 2.  (4) This article is worlds away from a , given the sources from points 1 and 2.  Further, even though this article isn't covered by ,  is not a wikipedia policy guideline, but rather an essay only. An article that meets  and  surely cannot be a  anyway.   and  are what matter here, and they're met
— User:AubreyEllenShomo, 19:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:V||WP:ORG||WP:COAT||WP:COAT||WP:COAT||WP:N||WP:V||WP:COAT||WP:V||WP:N (Wikipedia:Verifiability)