Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alleged 1991 drug business involvement of Álvaro Uribe


 * 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 wasDelete - POV and BLP concerns reinforce the strong consensus. Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 08:28, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Alleged 1991 drug business involvement of Álvaro Uribe

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The article was created in March 2005 to remove content from the main article: Álvaro Uribe. Although it is not entirely a "quotefarm", about half of the article consists of quotes, which goes against the spirit of the "Wikipedia is not a directory" provision of WP:NOT. In addition, I feel that the article places undue weight on one particular aspect of Uribe's presidency, in violation of the NPOV and biographies of living persons policies. These allegations (of involvement in the Colombian drug trade) are already mentioned in the main article in the section titled ""Early political controversy". Thus, I do not feel that a merge is necessary or warranted. Black Falcon (Talk) 00:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. This article is a content fork, and I trust Black Falcon that it's already covered in the main article.  The details of reactions of everyone involved are beyond the scope of Wikipedia. Shalom Hello 02:16, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and edit. Black Falcon said they were mentioned, which is about the size of it--they are not really covered beyond that, for the main article just refers here for the story. A good deal would need to be merged in, and the article is already quite long. The present article is not about his early activities in general--it is about a specific accusation by a specific US journalist, with the implications being not just that he was involved in drugs, but that the US government was deliberately covering it up. I think it remains unsettled to this day, and, though it may not be worth the detail of the present article, its appropriate for a long section or a shorter article. Read both articles for yourself, don't go by what I say about them. DGG (talk) 04:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - or definitely rename to shorter title. Onnaghar tl 13:15, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete I dont think any claims that are alleged and not proven, should be included in an encyclopedia, but rather should be in a newspaper Corpx 04:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * If that were the case, we wouldn't have any mention of U.S. claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction prior to the 2003 invasion. Though I certainly appreciate the need to keep out sensationalist gossip, I think your position is much too extreme, even to the point of going against WP:NPOV. Allegations, at times more so than facts, can be significant. Claims and beliefs often are more influential than verifiable facts. If these claims are presented in reliable sources, I think NPOV requires that we include them. — Black Falcon (Talk) 05:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep part of history, part of the story!! I would say rename it and put an NPOV tag -- F3rn4nd0 (Roger - Out) 13:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete: WP:BLP --Ecemaml 13:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, maybe not a quote farm, but a WP:BLP minefield to be sure. Burntsauce 18:27, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep per DGG. Mathmo Talk 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Black Falcon a clear violation of NPOV and clearly places Undue Weight.Harlowraman 00:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 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.