Talk:Scottish Secular Society
This article was nominated for deletion on 23 October 2013. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Neutrality
[edit]This article needs to be made more neutral, at the moment it heavily promotes the organisation. This is especially clear in the tone of the political lobbying section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Correctus2kX (talk • contribs) 12:52, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
This article is neutral in its tone. The section cited as being particularly promotional does no more than to lay out the organisation's largest current projects. There is also a section in the article which highlights criticisms of the organisation. While this section is small, that is reflective of the small size of the organisation. A lack of criticism does not belie a lack of neutrality
Contested deletion
[edit]This page is not unambiguously promotional, because It informs on the organisation's origins, current role and who it contains. There is no proselytizing or attempt to push a specific point. --130.209.157.35 (talk) 14:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
This article is neutral in its tone. The section cited as being particularly promotional does no more than to lay out the organisation's largest current projects. There is also a section in the article which highlights criticisms of the organisation. While this section is small, that is reflective of the small size of the organisation. A lack of criticism does not belie a lack of neutrality
This page should not be speedy deleted because...
[edit]This page should not be speedily deleted because... it is work in progress on a relatively new not-for-profit organisation that is rising to prominence in Scotland. We have a raft of independent sources to be added in the next few days.
the information is and will be put forward in a factual manner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgordon42 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
This page should not be speedy deleted because...
[edit]This page should not be speedily deleted because... the page is work in progress on a relatively new not-for-profit organisation. References will be added very shortly. The organisation is the Scottish equivalent of the UK National Secular Society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgordon42 (talk • contribs) 15:15, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Contested deletion
[edit]This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... This entry is a rewrite of Secular Scotland which was live for the last 6 months. The organisation's name changed recently and this page reflects that change - the original page has been given a redirect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgordon42 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Contested deletion
[edit]This page is not unambiguously promotional, because the references to it's function as a petitioning / lobbying body can be verified on the Scottish Government's website (see links on the page). Demonstrating it's existence as a public, historical, significant and active lobbying organization. Also new section added showing criticism urgo recognition of the organization by the free church of Scotland — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.193.242.107 (talk) 19:59, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
This page is important and informative, not self-promotion, and should not be deleted.
[edit]This page describes a recent arrival on the Scottish political scene, which has already presented a petition to the Scottish Parliament and attracted considerable press attention. It is currently the largest secularist organisation in Scotland.
This page is the successor to the page "Secular Scotland", because the society has changed its name, and that page now redirects here. OldChemProf (talk) 21:35, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Contest Deletion
[edit]This page demonstrates significant political involvement and discourse with the wider community! RoslinGenetics (talk) 21:35, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Thomas Aikenhead
[edit]It seems there was a bit of appropriation here. Aikenhead was hanged for blasphemy, but that did not involve secularism. The article should reflect this. Aikenhead is not what they represent him as.