| Revision as of 20:11, 29 July 2009 editLoverOfTheRussianQueen (talk | contribs)940 edits →Criticism of Bill O'Reilly (political commentator)← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:11, 29 July 2009 edit undoLoverOfTheRussianQueen (talk | contribs)940 editsm →Criticism of Bill O'Reilly (political commentator)Next edit → | ||
| Line 7: *'''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) *'''Delete''' - per nom. It is a POV fork, like most other "criticism of.." articles, which as the nominator says, are 'designed'' to lump all the negative things in one place. ] (]) 20:11, 29 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:11, 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)
- Delete - per nom. It is a POV fork, like most other "criticism of.." articles, which as the nominator says, are 'designed to lump all the negative things in one place. LoverOfTheRussianQueen (talk) 20:11, 29 July 2009 (UTC)