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 Keep per consensus. Pea ceNT 04:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TeachersCount[edit]

Tagged for speedy deletion as spam. Is obviously promotional in tone, but not properly spam, and has been brought back after WP:PROD so probably needs a fuller debate. Hard to say whether the group is truly significant or not. Clear conflict of interest from creating user, User:TeachersCount, which accounts for the advertorial tone. Guy (Help!) 07:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Multiple cited third-party refs assert notability. DMacks 19:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I wikified a little, & removed the lists of prominent celebrities who nominated their favorite teacher & appeared in ads and sponsors. It doesn't look that spammy now. I think the inline links to some independent sources, such as the NEA and whitehouse.gov show Notability: I'll rework them as references. The site is intended for the promotion of the profession, but that is what many N organizations do.DGG 19:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep I rewrote the entry to avoid a copy paste from their website. I think the organization might be notable per the media coverage it received after Mrs Bush visit. But the article lacks reliable sources attesting its notability. -- lucasbfr ^talk 10:29, 12 May 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.