Talk:Take Pride in America

This article was nominated for deletion on 1 April 2015. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government.

ARC and 1980s sources

Thanks to Fiachra10003's research we have sources from the American Recreation Coalition, including the ones cited ([1], [2]) as well as three NY Times sources from the 1980s ([3], [4], [5]). I'm not sure about the reliability of ARC's content. Then, they have an FAQ in which they say there was a separate program that ran from 1986 to 1992. We have to be careful for any source that it's referring to the program that's the subject of this article. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:01, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have been searching, but can find no sources later than 2011. Is this program still active? I can't find anything in the US Code that terminated it. -- Gadget850^talk 16:22, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at the extensive AfD discussion mentioned where there was a long dialog on this point. The bottom line is that the program has not been terminated and remains on the books but since the arrival of the new Interior Secretary, Sally Jewell, there has been no promotion of TPIA and its personnel have been assigned to other duties (to be clear, there's no evidence that there's a causal link between the change of secretaries and the de-emphasis - just the timing and the lack of any reference to TPIA in Jewell's speeches even where volunteering is discussed. Fiachra10003 (talk) 00:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Appropriate Tags

Dr. Fleischman, I saw you reverted my removal of the

tag. I don't think this tag remains appropriate since this is a tag designed to flag articles that may be candidates for AfD - and this article has already survived AfD. The tag documentation says it is intended for articles that are "reasonably likely to be non-notable (not the sort of subject that Wikipedia ought to have an article about)." While some doubt remains about its notability, "reasonably likely" doesn't seem a fair reflection of the current status. While there is no formal rule that says that an article should have any

tag removed post-AfD, that is typically the case. I think the third-party tag remains appropriate as some of the article was clearly written by someone called "TakePride" who likely has a CoI. Fiachra10003 (talk) 00:43, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An AfD that results in no consensus is quite different from an AfD that results in keep. The AfD established that there was no consensus, which means there remains a substantial existing question about whether the subject is notable or non-notable. If you want the tag removed you should obtain a consensus on this page, presumably by addressing the arguments raised by the editors who !voted for delete. You might also want to solicit input from the closing admin. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:20, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The only people who contributed to the discussion were you, me and User:Jytdog, alas, despite the voluminous correspondence. Jytdog's only outstanding question was the very reasonable but somewhat metaphysical one of "how can the subject be notable if there's no evidence to indicate its demise" (my paraphrasing). I'll refer you back to the tag language if you want to refresh your recollection. "reasonably likely to be non-notable" is not the same thing as the "substantial existing question" that you propose. Fiachra10003 (talk) 16:44, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pinging Jytdog and Sandstein to this discussion. If either one agrees to the removal of the tag then I'm fine with that. I just don't want either of them to feel steamrolled. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No opinion on the notability of this one, but after an AfD a deletion-releted tag is generally superfluous. Sandstein 19:10, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go ahead in a few days and remove the deletion tag but keep the third-party tags, unless anyone objects. Fiachra10003 (talk) 19:24, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Beat you to it. :-) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 19:37, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Current Status

I discovered, through more digging, that Interior is using TPIA as the legal framework for various partnershipe. I added a sentence explaining my understanding of the current status and citing the latest use of TPIA that I could find (March 2015). I can't find any sources confirming that the awards are actually dormant, though we've all seen the evidence of their absence. Any citations would be great. Fiachra10003 (talk) 14:14, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]