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. Randykitty (talk) 18:06, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MCLR (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

There's no indication of notability and no references, and the entire article is written in an unencyclopedic tone. A quick Google search does bring up a few results, but I don't see anything to sufficiently indicate notability. IagoQnsi (talk) 22:35, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Entire article is copied and pasted from the various sub-pages of http://www.marijuanacontrollegalizationrevenueact.com/what/ --Ahecht (TALK
  PAGE) 22:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: See also Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/MCLR_2016_Wiki_Version --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE) 22:50, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Please do not Delete: We are new to wikipedia. MCLR 2014 was an attempt to get adult use marijuana on the California Ballot. We had significant press coverage, but could not raise enough money for the 2014 ballot. We are moving forward with a 2016 initiative, and would like to document this on wikipedia. Thank you for your hard work to keep wikipedia accurate.--Morepot (talk) 03:08, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia is not a soap box. If there is extensive non-trivial media coverage then it should be used to present a neutral article. I couldn't find any reliable sources that establish the notability of the proposed bill. Not having notability doesn't mean that the proposed ballot initiative doesn't have merit, just that it's probably WP:TOOSOON for a Wikipedia article.--Ahecht (TALK
  PAGE) 04:32, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Also, by saying "we" you are implying that you have a conflict of interest andor that you may be using a shared account. --Ahecht (TALK
  PAGE) 19:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Note from Volunteer Author: I believe "we" was intended to include all contributors and future contributors or editors, once people in the community have been told about this wikipedia page...I hope to see many more edits and contributors. I have personally been involved with the MCLR and CCHI efforts for about 2 years as a volunteer and believe this is a noble effort, please excuse my lack of wikipedia etiquette as i am a newbie, thanks for the help.

Also as the person who did the initial sandbox copy and paste, and subsequent creative commons request to the people at MCLR 2014 in order to comply with fair use licensing...i request that anyone interested may contact me with additional recommendations to clean up this article to comply with standard wiki formatting, thanks again Ganjagreg (talk) 20:18, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete In order to have an article about this, it must be WP:Notable as Wikipedia defines it. That means that it has received significant coverage from independent reliable sources. That does not appear to be the case for this proposped initiative. Note to User:Ganjagreg and User:Morepot, this is not a social media site which you can use to promote your cause. This is an international encyclopedia, and the only articles we can have here are things that qualify to be an article in an encyclopedia. There are many places where you can promote your initiative and gather supporters (try Facebook), but Wikipedia isn't one of them. If it qualifies for the ballot at some time in the future, then it will (possibly) qualify for an article here. --MelanieN (talk) 03:03, 27 April 2014 (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.