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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:26, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DRASTIC (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

A previous discussion had resulted in a Merge, this has now been challenged. Over a year ago.

It is a small group that seems to have no independent notability outside of the lab leak theory (which this was merged with) and which has too little, information to really warrant its own page Slatersteven (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Slatersteven (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: COVID-19 and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:25, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Passes GNG. This was the previous discussion. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 17:26, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – This online activist group passes Wikipedia's notability guidelines due to focused, extensive, and sustained coverage in reliable sources such as CNET, The Hindu, and the recent Le Monde article I added to the page. This article details the group's activities and influence on the COVID-19 origin debate, especially its efforts to uncover key documents and promote awareness around the lab leak theory as plausible. DRASTIC's leaking of the DEFUSE proposal from a source in DARPA, significantly changed the tone and discourse around the lab leak theory, prompting responses from the US government, Chinese state media, and the WHO. 103.156.74.129 (talk) 17:53, 14 March 2025 (UTC) — 103.156.74.129 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Added previous AFD, which closed as keep, when it was under a different title. Skynxnex (talk) 18:40, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to COVID-19 lab leak theory Not every minor aspect of the COVID-19 pandemic warrants a standalone article. This grouped gained some media attention in 2021, but this was not WP:SUSTAINED. Standalone articles require more than just brief bursts of coverage spanning a few months. This group's activites are already discussed in the lab-leak article. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The recent and prominent profile by Le Monde [1] show that coverage is indeed WP:SUSTAINED. 103.156.74.129 (talk) 04:04, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• @Shibbolethink: @JPxG:, two users active in the recent merge discussion. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[Keep] DRASTIC was instrumental in producing evidence for the lab leak, and is cited widely. Covid-19 was a disaster of such enormity that this group clearly needs to stay. As to not being very current, neither is the NAZI party, but nobody would suggest it is not notable! Tuntable (talk) 23:19, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Subject of widespread coverage. This recent article in Le Monde, published five years after the group's founding, demonstrates its lasting notability:[2]. Thriley (talk) 22:11, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given the topic area I'd like to get more input on this before closing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:09, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect. Coverage was not WP:SUSTAINED. They had a burst of coverage in 2021 and that was it. DRASTIC is mentioned 4 times in COVID-19 lab leak theory and I think that is sufficient to cover this topic. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:34, 22 March 2025 (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.