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. Nobody apart from the nominator supports deletion, and since we do not vote here, the opinion by Parksbows counts as much as any other. Sandstein 19:41, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PEPA (organization)[edit]

PEPA (organization) (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)

very local environmental group, no general notability DGG ( talk ) 10:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:51, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:51, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I don't see myself eligible to vote because I've created the page and my opinion might look biased, so I will humbly accept the opinion of the other experienced editors here. Yet, I wish to comment why I created the page: 1) It looks like the organization is more than 100 years old (under different name but still has the legacy) and its actions over that period of time seemed significant to me. Unfortunately, not all of the sources were accessible because many of them were archived in the old newspapers and libraries. I found what I could online, if anyone has access to other sources and wishes to help this project, I would appreciate it. 2) PEPA caught my attention because this organization has been fighting for a long time for the green environment and better Earth - all for the benefit of the future generations and I find during this dark time of ecological nihilism from many governments, this type of organization will have additional weight and significance for many good people among Wikipedia editors. 3) The organization (based in Purchase) never claimed its actions were local - it claims to be a US environmental agency eager to protect the rights of the US citizens. I believe that for at least part of its actions seem to have an impact across several US states, so it is for at least regional or multi-state.(New England?) 4)I replaced the link 11 with more appropriate one. If anyone wishes to help with more suggestions and links, you are more than welcome.--Parksbows (talk) 20:55, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I note that Parksbows is allowed to submit a recommendation here notwithstanding that they created this article. However, they are incorrect to say that PEPA "never claimed its actions were local". From the "about" page on its website: "The Purchase Environmental Protective Association (PEPA) is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting the environment and preserving the character of our community. By monitoring development proposals and informing the public on local environmental issues facing Purchase and the local area, PEPA’s involvement and documentation of the historical, cultural, and natural features of its unique landscape serves as a vital resource to the community." (Emphasis added.) Technically, the organization's activities might extend into New England because New England includes Connecticut and Purchase, New York is very close to the Connecticut border, but I would not consider it a regional or multi-state organization. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 20:31, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hi, Metropolitan90! I’m glad that someone have finally commented here. I’m allowed to comment thanks to the Wikipedia rules (and I’m even allowed to vote but I do not want to abuse this rule) and I think it is right because I can explain here the reasons behind the article’s creation. I find that Westchester County Airport initiative in collaboration with the other environmental organizations (the links are in the article) is a good indication that PEPA is not a local agency by the nature of its actions. Westchester Airport was supposed to have millions of passengers a year and thousands of airplane flights and every major international airport has a global effect. This fact puts PEPA’s initiative far beyond local and one state organization (not a small state I must confess). Another case, the New York state’s lawsuit in the Supreme Court was widely discussed by the newspapers. And here is the New York Times’ article from 2004 https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/nyregion/footlights.html which speaks about PEPA’s history (87 years old agency by 2004) and its involvement with PepsiCo in the previous years. As I already told before, not all the sources were available to me and some of the sources about the organization might be found in the libraries and archives of the newspapers of the New York State. Let's hope that 2020 will be a better year for our planet's ecology! Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays everyone!!!--Parksbows (talk) 21:47, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:15, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Judging the sources given, it meets WP:ORGCRIT. The article could do with cleanup though. – DarkGlow (talk) 17:05, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep local environmental advocacy organization that has gotten some significant news coverage.NotButtigieg (talk) 12:39, 3 January 2020 (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.