| Revision as of 18:39, 26 July 2013 editGregJackP (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers24,868 edits cmt← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:01, 27 July 2013 edit undoBorock (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,188 edits →Steve King cantaloupe calves comment controversyNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| *'''Keep''' This is a unique story, especially for its ]. Immigration is a huge issue in American politics and there are multiple commentary how this controversy effects that debate.] (]) 18:33, 26 July 2013 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' This is a unique story, especially for its ]. Immigration is a huge issue in American politics and there are multiple commentary how this controversy effects that debate.] (]) 18:33, 26 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
| ::'''Comment''' - "unique story" = news; and it hasn't really had an effect. No legislation has been passed on the matter and at this time it is just a POV fork. Until it becomes more important and does have an actual effect, it belongs on the ] page. <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#fffff4">] ]</span> 18:39, 26 July 2013 (UTC) | ::'''Comment''' - "unique story" = news; and it hasn't really had an effect. No legislation has been passed on the matter and at this time it is just a POV fork. Until it becomes more important and does have an actual effect, it belongs on the ] page. <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#fffff4">] ]</span> 18:39, 26 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' Every bad-taste comment made is not a notable topic for a WP article. The article also did not mention any controversy since nobody seemed to be defending the comments. A controversy needs two sides. I haven't checked it out but I have a feeling the info is already well-reported in ].] (]) 00:01, 27 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:01, 27 July 2013
Steve King cantaloupe calves comment controversy
- Steve King cantaloupe calves comment controversy (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)
Misplaced Pages is not news. Entry duplicates information in article on Steve King. POV fork. GregJackP Boomer! 18:10, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
- Delete - Per GregJackP. Jackmcbarn (talk) 18:12, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Casprings (talk) 18:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Casprings (talk) 18:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
- Keep This is a unique story, especially for its WP:effect. Immigration is a huge issue in American politics and there are multiple commentary how this controversy effects that debate.Casprings (talk) 18:33, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
- Comment - "unique story" = news; and it hasn't really had an effect. No legislation has been passed on the matter and at this time it is just a POV fork. Until it becomes more important and does have an actual effect, it belongs on the Steve King page. GregJackP Boomer! 18:39, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Every bad-taste comment made is not a notable topic for a WP article. The article also did not mention any controversy since nobody seemed to be defending the comments. A controversy needs two sides. I haven't checked it out but I have a feeling the info is already well-reported in Steve King.Borock (talk) 00:01, 27 July 2013 (UTC)