Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Investigative Project on Terrorism: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:28, 22 September 2014

Investigative Project on Terrorism

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Noncompliance, and failure to meet criteria for notability per Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies) Atsme☯^Consult 17:31, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:21, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There are many sources discussing the IPT. Mina Ivanova says that the IPT is founded by Steven Emerson, and that the non-profit "claims to offer 'the world's most comprehensive data center on radical Islamic groups'". The Ivanova piece is found within the Clarke Rountree-edited book Venomous Speech, published by ABC-CLIO. Deepa Kumar writes that the IPT is one of the top six purveyors of anti-Muslim racism in the US, on pages 188–189 of Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, published by Haymarket Books. In Speculative Security: The Politics of Pursuing Terrorist Monies, published by the University of Minnesota Press, political scientist Marieke de Goede writes about IPT in a long paragraph on page 15, and a sizable footnote on page 225, describing it as a key source of information intended to keep terrorist financing in front of the public. In Lone Wolf Terror and the Rise of Leaderless Resistance, published by Vanderbilt University, criminologist George Michael says on page 193 that IPT is one of three NGOs that US authorities refer to with regard to the activities of radical Islam. George Michael also writes in the Middle East Quarterly that the IPT has "conducted investigations into many Islamist and terrorist groups and individuals... stirred up more hornets' nests than many government agencies... hone in on targets that broader agencies missed." Scholars Melva Underbakke and Pedro Ruz Gutierrez wrote an article published by the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs: "After 10-Year Investigation, U.S. Government Fails to Convict Dr. Sami Al-Arian". The article describes IPT as an authority on radical Islam, quoting "senior terrorism analyst" Brian Hecht of IPT on the case of Dr. Sami Al-Arian. I think all this coverage by high quality sources establishes notability, and the presence of Brian Hecht in a number of cites, and the absence of Steven Emerson, means that IPT cannot simply be merged to the Steven Emerson biography. The IPT article should stay. Binksternet (talk) 21:27, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
keep Per Binksternet.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 22:36, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete reasons in my comment below. Atsme☯^Consult 23:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Binksternet, I'm a little confused by your vote to "keep" the article considering two months ago you stated: I'm in favor of moving this article to Investigative Project on Terrorism Foundation as you suggest, and having the Emerson biography corrected to reflect accurate secondary sources (rather than self-serving primary sources) but I'm not so hot on the idea that all of Emerson's former activities should be fully removed from this article. We should tell the reader what came before, and how it is related. Binksternet (talk) 21:20, 2 July 2014 (UTC) Diff is here: [1]. The foundation itself has no notability without Steven Emerson attached, and no one would know anything about it if it weren't for their own press releases, and self-published websites. Anything readers need to know about Emerson's work prior to 2006 can be found in Steven Emerson, and if it isn't there, it can be added. The IPT article is supposed to be about a notable nonprofit organization - The Investigative Project on Terrorism Foundation that was organized in 2006 - anything prior to that time belongs to Steven Emerson. There simply aren't enough reliable secondary sources, and no third party sources that substantiate the Foundation's notability. Notability for an organization is neither inherent, nor inherited. The "reliable" sources you cited above are not neutral, particularly Deepa Kumar. D. Pipes is more neutral. Regardless, where is the balance? There simply are no secondary sources available to present a neutral, well-balanced article. One editor violated WP:NOR, and WP:SYNTH to create the infobox. As it stands now, the article is nothing more than a WP:Coatrack. If you believe the sources you cited are all that's needed to improve the article, please improve it. However, as the lead editor, I can assure you will find major obstacles trying to find reliable secondary sources that support the Foundation. All you will find are self-published press releases, original docs from Congressional hearings, and Emerson's television interviews. In fact, a while back you deleted the sections I included for neutrality as follows: (→‎Boston Marathon Bombing: delete section... this issue is of very little importance in the case. The videos posted by the two bombers were little seen. The IPT did nothing substantial here.), and also another one: (Undid revision 600924125 by Atsme (talk) The group also eats lunch. We don't tell the reader about unimportant activities such as this one with little reaction in the media.). Diffs are here: [2] The comments you made then still hold true today. The article lacks notability, so I don't understand why you are voting to keep it now. Atsme☯^Consult 23:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 *'''Keep'''. There are many sources discussing the IPT. [http://books.google.com/books?id=jf3YAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA376&dq=%22Investigative+Project+on+Terrorism%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=k4cgVIX7LKiV8gHrioC4CA&ved=0CFQQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=%22Investigative%20Project%20on%20Terrorism%22&f=false Mina Ivanova says that the IPT] is founded by Steven Emerson, and that the non-profit "claims to offer 'the world's most comprehensive data center on radical Islamic groups'". The Ivanova piece is found within the Clarke Rountree-edited book ''Venomous Speech'', published by ABC-CLIO. [[Deepa Kumar]] writes that the IPT is one of the top six purveyors of anti-Muslim racism in the US, on [http://books.google.com/books?id=IAa2rGX44ocC&pg=PT189 pages 188–189] of ''Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire'', published by Haymarket Books. In ''Speculative Security: The Politics of Pursuing Terrorist Monies'', published by the University of Minnesota Press, political scientist Marieke de Goede [http://books.google.com/books?id=5JfLL8rqx1IC&pg=PA15 writes about IPT in a long paragraph on page 15, and a sizable footnote on page 225], describing it as a key source of information intended to keep terrorist financing in front of the public. In ''Lone Wolf Terror and the Rise of Leaderless Resistance'', published by Vanderbilt University, criminologist George Michael [http://books.google.com/books?id=LsceLwil6qUC&pg=PA193&dq=%22Investigative+Project+on+Terrorism%22+emerson&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vYogVI69F8eu8AHFx4CQCA&ved=0CDkQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=%22Investigative%20Project%20on%20Terrorism%22%20emerson&f=false says on page 193] that IPT is one of three NGOs that US authorities refer to with regard to the activities of radical Islam. George Michael also writes in the ''Middle East Quarterly'' that the IPT has [http://www.meforum.org/2578/steven-emerson-combating-radical-islam "conducted investigations into many Islamist and terrorist groups and individuals... stirred up more hornets' nests than many government agencies... hone in on targets that broader agencies missed."] Scholars Melva Underbakke and Pedro Ruz Gutierrez wrote an article published by the ''Washington Report on Middle East Affairs'': [http://www.questia.com/magazine/1P3-958998511/after-10-year-investigation-u-s-government-fails "After 10-Year Investigation, U.S. Government Fails to Convict Dr. Sami Al-Arian"]. The article describes IPT as an authority on radical Islam, quoting "senior terrorism analyst" Brian Hecht of IPT on the case of Dr. Sami Al-Arian. I think all this coverage by high quality sources establishes notability, and the presence of Brian Hecht in a number of cites, and the absence of Steven Emerson, means that IPT cannot simply be merged to the [[Steven Emerson]] biography. The IPT article should stay. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet|talk]]) 21:27, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 *'''keep''' Per Binksternet.[[User:Serialjoepsycho|Serialjoepsycho]] ([[User talk:Serialjoepsycho|talk]]) 22:36, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' reasons in my comment below. <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.1em 0.1em 0.4em,#F2CEF2 -0.4em -0.4em 0.6em,#90EE90 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#E6FFFF"><b>[[User:Atsme|Atsme]]</b></font><font color="gold">&#9775;</font>[[User talk:Atsme|<font color="green"><sup>Consult</sup></font>]] 23:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
+**'''Comment''' {{u|Binksternet}}, I'm a little confused by your vote to "keep" the article considering two months ago you stated:  {{xt|I'm in favor of moving this article to [[Investigative Project on Terrorism Foundation]] as you suggest, and having the Emerson biography corrected to reflect accurate secondary sources (rather than self-serving primary sources) but I'm not so hot on the idea that all of Emerson's former activities should be fully removed from this article. We should tell the reader what came before, and how it is related. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet|talk]]) 21:20, 2 July 2014 (UTC)}} Diff is here: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AInvestigative_Project_on_Terrorism&diff=615348074&oldid=615341422].  The foundation itself has no notability without Steven Emerson attached, and no one would know anything about it if it weren't for their own press releases, and self-published websites.  Anything readers need to know about Emerson's work prior to 2006 can be found in [[Steven Emerson]], and if it isn't there, it can be added.  The IPT article is supposed to be about a notable nonprofit organization - The Investigative Project on Terrorism Foundation that was organized in 2006 - anything prior to that time belongs to [[Steven Emerson]].  There simply aren't enough reliable secondary sources, and no third party sources that substantiate the Foundation's notability.  Notability for an organization is neither inherent, nor inherited.  The "reliable" sources you cited above are not neutral, particularly Deepa Kumar.  D. Pipes is more neutral.  Regardless, where is the balance?  There simply are no secondary sources available to present a neutral, well-balanced article.  One editor violated [[WP:NOR]], and [[WP:SYNTH]] to create the infobox.  As it stands now, the article is nothing more than a [[WP:Coatrack]].  If you believe the sources you cited are all that's needed to improve the article, please improve it.  However, as the lead editor, I can assure you will find major obstacles trying to find reliable secondary sources that support the Foundation.  All you will find are self-published press releases, original docs from Congressional hearings, and Emerson's television interviews.  In fact, a while back you deleted the sections I included for neutrality as follows: {{xt|(→‎Boston Marathon Bombing:   delete section... this issue is of very little importance in the case. The videos posted by the two bombers were little seen. The IPT did nothing substantial here.)}}, and also another one: {{xt|(Undid revision 600924125 by Atsme (talk) The group also eats lunch. We don't tell the reader about unimportant activities such as this one with little reaction in the media.)}}. Diffs are here: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Investigative_Project_on_Terrorism&diff=600926362&oldid=600903758]   The comments you made then still hold true today.  The article lacks notability, so I don't understand why you are voting to keep it now. <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.1em 0.1em 0.4em,#F2CEF2 -0.4em -0.4em 0.6em,#90EE90 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#E6FFFF"><b>[[User:Atsme|Atsme]]</b></font><font color="gold">&#9775;</font>[[User talk:Atsme|<font color="green"><sup>Consult</sup></font>]] 23:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)