Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Walmart


 * 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 WP:SNOW keep. There is no reasonable prospect for a consensus to delete this article at this point. Also noting the previous discussion at Articles for deletion/Criticism of Wal-Mart, as this was not posted here. BD2412 T 22:33, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Criticism of Walmart

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article is inherently bias and doesn't give a full picture of Walmart as a company. A lot of the topics in the article are also extremely regional, trivial, and wouldn't be notable on their own. For instance an employee getting fired from a local Walmart for smoking pot or a few of their locations being ran poorly. A lot of the sources are extremely questionable also. While I'd be fine with whatever content in this is actually notable being merged into Walmart, I don't think there is enough there to warrant keeping such a clearly slanted article. Adamant1 (talk) 06:35, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. ProcrasinatingReader (talk) 08:41, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ProcrasinatingReader (talk) 08:41, 13 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep entire books and films have been made about this topic. Needing cleanup isn’t a reason to delete something. Dronebogus (talk) 14:20, 13 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. This is a notable topic about the largest company in the world. As Dronebogus notes, there have been multiple documentaries about this topic. AviationFreak 15:37, 13 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. A clearly notable topic. -  DoubleCross  ( ‡ ) 16:33, 13 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep: There are 257 citations in this article, including articles in the Washington Post, the New York Times and USA Today and several published books, specifically about this topic. The nominator is incorrect that "Criticism of" articles are inherently biased; they simply require the use of reliable sources to summarize and explain the criticism. The inclusion of some trivial information and poor sources should be cleared up by normal editing, not a nomination for deletion. — Toughpigs (talk) 20:01, 13 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep As stated at Articles for deletion/Criticism of Comcast, the topic is notable, cleanup is a matter for editing rather than deletion, and it's not Wikipedia's job to provide false balance. The "N" in NPOV means reflecting the sources fairly, not saying one good thing every time we say one bad thing. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 23:33, 13 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep And clean up.-- Surv1v4l1st ▌Talk 21:34, 14 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. Like the nom, I feel uneasy about the wisdom of any all-negative article, on the theory that it creates undue emphasis here, and lack of due emphasis over in the Walmart article.  This particular list is well-organized, well-sourced and seems like the right tone.  This is good material, it should stay.  (I'm curious why it doesn't mention THE primary criticism of Wal-Mart in its expansion years, the way it suddenly dominated rural localities and played havoc with local businesses, job markets, wages, taxes, and traffic patterns, but I guess that's dusty economic history now.)  --Lockley (talk) 09:24, 16 June 2020 (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.