Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free The Hops (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was still no consensus, particularly regarding its notability. IronGargoyle 20:22, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Free The Hops[edit]

This article is about a two-year-old lobbying group seeking to change beer laws in a single state. Note that its peer groups in other states, mentioned in the article, are not in Wikipedia; neither are several more notable Alabama lobbies. WP:CORP, possible WP:COI as creator has same name as Free the Hops spokesman (news video). Last AfD drew only three editors, including the creator. Rob C (Alarob) 04:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - As expressed when I lost the first nomination, this is a non-notable lobby group. If they manage to get this bill passed, and it's an historic bill, then we should certainly include them. However, until then they in no way meet the notability guidelines. Once again, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MGMbill.org for more discussion on lobby and special interest groups. I would suggest that a brief mention of the group at an article related to beer, or laws on alcohol consumption would be sufficient. --Walter Görlitz 04:32, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article appears to have multiple independent references from reliable sources, so I think notability has been established. --Eastmain 05:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. Most of the Google hits are more in the way of forum posts or promotional material. There's been a little bit of coverage by al.com (Disclosure alert: I work for the company which owns that site and one of the newspapers which supplies its content) but otherwise, it's very little. They group simply doesn't quite clear the bar of notability, at least not yet. Realkyhick 05:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete--ZayZayEM 05:43, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 12:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Of the three references two (B&W and one of the Huntsville Times) are about the organization. The Daily Show segment is not cited but does list airdate - I don't believe the Daily Show contributes to notability in the way that CNN or network news does, but I'm not willing to argue the point. So it's two local sources. Seems to depend on how one feels about "multiple." Scope isn't national, and any group can lobby for a bill - a bill that passes is certainly more notable. But still, it seems to just squeak by IMVHO. LaughingVulcan 23:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Does this suggest we need articles on the Georgia and North Carolina beer lobbies? -- Rob C (Alarob) 16:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Reply: If there are independent and reliably sourced information about them, and the article is written in neutral point of view, yes. Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. There might even be room for statewide anti-beer lobbies, if such exist. Or better still, a single unified article about legislative lobbying related to the beer industry on the national and statewide levels. Are you suggesting that efforts related to lobbying about beer on a statewide level are not notable? I'd then refer you to the article Prohibition. LaughingVulcan 18:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - I have no dog in this fight, and was just trying to advance the discussion. I think your suggestion of a more comprehensive article about state lobbying efforts about beer (or alcoholic beverages) is a good one. -- Rob C (Alarob) 23:07, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but perhaps merge. Wikipedia is not paper, and there does seem to be some notability established. I think the article could be merged into one with a larger scope, such as one that includes the other two mentioned organizations, or one about (anti-) alcohol law movements. Aleta 17:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge. The information here, to the extent that it is neutral and verifiable, is valuable to the encyclopedia project and should be kept, whether or not it is in the context of an independent article I would leave up to the editors. --Dystopos 16:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.