Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Moore controversies (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   speedy keep as pure disruption. (non-admin closure) Sceptre (talk) 09:21, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Michael Moore controversies
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete and userfy for creators and/or supporting editors, until all attack POV is removed, per BLP. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:25, 17 March 2009 (UTC) Ism schism (talk) 00:25, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  —Ism schism (talk) 00:35, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, no clear deletion rationale given. WillOakland (talk) 01:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep It seems well sourced to me. POVs are attributed etc. A valid spin out from the main article. --neon white talk 01:35, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Split and Merge into the individual film articles. This article professes to be a Michael Moore criticism, but as it is written now it fails to meet neutrality standards. Also, the current layout of this article suggests that we actually have criticism of Michael Moore's films. As film criticism does not fall prey to BLP concerns, and because these criticisms could make an excellent part of balanced film articles, I believe this should be split up and merged. JRP (talk) 01:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge - Same as above. I see no reason why individual criticisms can't be merged with their respective film pages. That is the best place for them. Dynablaster (talk) 01:52, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem is they arent all related to films. --neon white talk 02:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * All but the hurricane Gustav comments, no? Dynablaster (talk) 02:13, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly so there is a proportion that doesnt overlap. --neon white talk 06:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep- Completely valid concept for an article. Needs to be/stay sourced and NPOV, but thats a matter for editors, not deletion. Umbralcorax (talk) 02:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to Michael Moore--from there, perhaps, to individual films if that's the topic of discussion. Drmies (talk) 02:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe it is a spin out so it's already part of that article. --neon white talk 06:46, 17 March 2009 (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.