Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Controversy surrounding Liberty


 * 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   merge to Liberty University. The Bushranger One ping only 03:39, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Controversy surrounding Liberty

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Page was created to split this information from Liberty University. I believe the split is not necessary and that the controversies belong in the original article, as splitting them off adds no value and is confusing to people not familiar with the matter. &theta;v&xi;r    mag&xi;   spellbook 01:31, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge That fork is so forky it could take your eye out! Its sole purpose appears to be to bury content, content that is central to the main article because it reveals a lot about Liberty University's identity and ethos. Meowy 02:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The fork does not even have a link back to the main Liberty University article! Meowy 02:27, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge with Liberty University. As an independent article, it is a point of view fork. NJ Wine (talk) 03:44, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge It's well sourced, and could easily fit in the main article. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:41, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:14, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. This much content is giving undue weight to a few incidents; merging everything back into the article would not be productive.  Even if you want to keep the information in the article, why do we have to merge?  Just delete this title and revert the edits that split it out of the university's article.  Nyttend (talk) 01:23, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, "merge" doesn't mean simply adding all the content of one article unchanged into the existing content of another artcle. Meowy 12:20, 10 June 2012 (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.