| Revision as of 19:00, 29 July 2009 editCrotalus horridus (talk | contribs)Rollbackers7,850 edits Creating deletion discussion page for Criticism of Bill O'Reilly (political commentator). using TW | Revision as of 19:03, 29 July 2009 edit undoSoxwon (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers7,494 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: :{{la|Criticism of Bill O'Reilly (political commentator)}} (<span class="plainlinks">]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude> Yes, I know this has been nominated for deletion before, but it's been a few months since the last try, so let's see if ]. The fundamental problem with this article is that it is a ]. Yes, the assertions in this article are sourced, but that doesn't change the fact that this article is ''designed'' to lump all the negative things about O'Reilly in one place. O'Reilly is a very controversial public figure — which is why notable criticisms of him should be incorporated throughout ], not sequestered into a fork. Having an article that consists entirely of criticism seems inconsistent with the spirit of ] and ]. We don't (and shouldn't) have a ] article, and I don't see a "criticism" article as any better. Yes, I know that "criticism" can technically refer to either positive or negative reception, but that's not how the term is used here, it's not what the article contains, and it's not the case for any other Misplaced Pages article that begins with "Criticism of...". In my opinion they should all be redirected or deleted. ] 19:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC) *'''Keep''' As much as I would like to see this trimmed and added to the main article, the current volume of information would make the main article far too large. ] (]) 19:03, 29 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:03, 29 July 2009
Criticism of Bill O'Reilly (political commentator)
AfDs for this article:- Criticism of Bill O'Reilly (political commentator) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Yes, I know this has been nominated for deletion before, but it's been a few months since the last try, so let's see if consensus has changed. The fundamental problem with this article is that it is a POV fork. Yes, the assertions in this article are sourced, but that doesn't change the fact that this article is designed to lump all the negative things about O'Reilly in one place. O'Reilly is a very controversial public figure — which is why notable criticisms of him should be incorporated throughout his main article, not sequestered into a fork. Having an article that consists entirely of criticism seems inconsistent with the spirit of WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. We don't (and shouldn't) have a Praise of Bill O'Reilly article, and I don't see a "criticism" article as any better. Yes, I know that "criticism" can technically refer to either positive or negative reception, but that's not how the term is used here, it's not what the article contains, and it's not the case for any other Misplaced Pages article that begins with "Criticism of...". In my opinion they should all be redirected or deleted. *** Crotalus *** 19:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- Keep As much as I would like to see this trimmed and added to the main article, the current volume of information would make the main article far too large. Soxwon (talk) 19:03, 29 July 2009 (UTC)