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 delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:00, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Action for our Planet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Promotion by TheWorld2011 (talk · contribs). Irrelevant organisation, does not meet WP:NGO (they're nonexistent in the media). bender235 (talk) 22:19, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Almost every source is from either the website of the group or an unreliable blog, and no other sources seem to exist. I'd almost say this could be speedied as an advertisement, since the whole article is really just promoting an agenda. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 22:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. All sources are from the organization (that's right, I just used American spelling!) itself or unreliable activist publications. No coverage in reliable, third-party media sources. BurtAlert (talk) 22:46, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:15, 29 March 2011 (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.