Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sexual Compulsives Anonymous
Providing the article is extensively rewritten, or reverted, to make it into a |neutral article rather than something that looks more like a SCA brochure, per  and , before the AfD period is up. Also providing someone can find or provide |independent reliable sources, such as mainstream newspaper or news magazine articles or academic journal articles, or independent books, to establish |notability. Although I have heard of SCA for some time and strongly suspect that it is notable and deserves an article, I haven't found reliable sources that support that.  Some of the past inappropriate language and uncivil comments are very troubling, otherwise I would be arguing harder to keep the article. The only reason I !voted conditional keep, is that I believe in improving articles rather than deleting them. In response to another comment, this AfD has absolutely nothing to do with homophobia, and I'm an editor who has a good record defending LGBT related articles. Nor is it a right wing attack. I reluctantly but essentially agree with most of Wooty's rationale. Bottom line: If the article is not cleaned up and RS not found, then '''Delete
— User:Becksguy, 09:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NPOV||WP:COI||WP:POV||WP:RS||WP:NOTE (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view)