Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cult and new religious movement researchers (2nd nomination)


 * 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 Keep, but not because it should necessarily be kept, but because AfD is not a venue for content or editor disputes. Find the right venue. May I suggest WP:DR or WP:3O? Keeper  |   76  18:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

List of cult and new religious movement researchers
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The combination of strict inclusion criteria and strict sourcing criteria has led to an empty list i.e. a list without sourced entries. User:DoctorW insists on strict inclusion criteria which user:Andries opposes and user:Andries insists on strict sourcing criteria. Andries (talk) 09:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment- completing nom. No opinion given. Sting au  Buzz Me...   11:54, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete and start over. Although this survived an AFD challenge only 2 1/2 months ago, this list would appear to have self-destructed and rendered itself moot owing to the circumstances described by the nominator. Since it clearly passed the last AFD challenge, maybe the best thing for it is to start over from scratch (which is why I'm suggesting delete this one outright, with no prejudice towards recreation later). 23skidoo (talk) 16:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * An alternative would be to start dispute resolution to have the inclusion criteria not so strict. But I am not going to do the effort. Andries (talk) 16:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This version would be fine for me as a starting point but user:DoctorW disagrees and reverted too make the inclustion criteria stricter again. Andries (talk) 19:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete and start over. It seems that starting the article from the scratch is a good idea.--Larno Man (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as a notable subject; but the list itself, and its terms of inclusion, may need to be re-examined. I agree that dispute resolution may be the way to go here. Terraxos (talk) 03:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and solve editing dispute at correct venue. AfD can not fix editing disputes.  Deleting the article and starting over will not magically solve anything.  JERRY talk contribs 04:11, 4 February 2008 (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.