Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicago Torture Justice Center

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. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 21:03, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Torture Justice Center

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This article was made in user-space, moved to main space, draftified, and moved back, and moved through various names, so its deletion is clearly controversial, at least with its creator. It has already, under another name, been nominated for speedy deletion. The problem with it is that it's extremely contentious, but lacks any inline citations. I'd have no problem with the creator incubating it properly in draft space or their own space and putting proper references, but to dump this uncited into main-space is completely wrong. I don't know if it should be speedied, draftified, or discussed properly, so we're here. Elemimele (talk) 21:15, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Illinois. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:31, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and nuke it from orbit and start over, whether it's notable or not, it's basically an unfinished homework assignment and makes no sense. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 22:18, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NOTESSAY and WP:OR. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 03:15, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Subject does not meet the WP:GNG as this is currently written. WP:NOTESSAY and WP:OR apply as well. User:Let'srun 15:19, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: per G11. This article includes background information about what lead to the creation of the organization and then a pitch for the organization itself. Even if this does meet NORG, the prose is not worth saving and I would vote to TNT this. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:03, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete should be speedy, G11, but we're here. microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish·growths)} 14:27, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and creation protect. Besides still being so poorly written that it needs to be deleted outright, it smacks of an opinionated essay, which is untenable in 2023. Bearian (talk) 20:07, 19 December 2023 (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.