Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poland's betrayal by the Western Allies

Poland's betrayal by the Western Allies was listed on WP:VFD July 6 to July 18 2004, consensus was not reached (10 votes to delete, 6 to keep, 4 to merge/move/redirect). This is an archive of the deletion debate: please do not edit this page. -- Graham &#9786; | Talk 20:29, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

This page should be deleted permaneantly. As stated in my vote, it can never be NPOV. This article would never be in another online encyclopedia, nor would it ever have been added if it was not a wiki. Some articles, such as List of north american area codes serve a purpose while not something one would find in a print edition. This one, however, is not, and even if it is not deleted it should not remain under this title, which no one looking for NPOV article would type in to search for.--naryathegreat 23:28, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

Currently, a two-thirds majority supports deletion.


 * Delete. The problem is not the content but the title.  If the title were something like "Some people's theory that Poland was betrayed by the Western allies" (this would need some rejiggering) it would be o.k.  --Daniel C. Boyer 12:36, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Everyking 23:40, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: by virtue of its title it must be POV. Its existence is a POV violation. Geogre 23:46, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect - this information has no business existing under the blatantly POV title. It can easily be moved to the appropriate article from the History of Poland series, with a redirect left at this title to preserve the history of the contributions.  Failing that, rename to something that doesn't bias the reader the moment they see the title. Jwrosenzweig 23:51, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. JFW | T@lk  00:20, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Maximus Rex 01:26, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. How did it survive this long with such a title?  &larr;Humus sapiens&larr;Talk 01:38, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Fully agree with Adam's suggestions below: rename, rewrite, unPOVify. Alternative: create another article titled Poland's betrayal by Russia  &larr;Humus sapiens&larr;Talk 01:55, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pure POV, and it cannot ever by NPOV.  It does not help that this site will hardly if ever be noticed by anyone except Polish nationalists, and the fact that Poles almost entirely wrote the page does nothing for it haveing NPOV.  Even the title is POV.--naryathegreat 23:21, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Leave. Brilliantly written neutral account for the less known aspects of WW II. Space Cadet 23:26, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * A suggestion: The article should be renamed Polish border question (1918-1947) and rewritten, incorporating the material at Curzon Line and some material from the History of Poland series. The article should be written by someone familiar with Polish and World War II history, and Polish nationalist coommentary should be excluded. Adam 02:06, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Edit and merge into History of Poland or somewhere. It's very POV now but i don't think it's unsalvageable. Pyrop 02:52, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Strip out the POV stuff and rename it to Polish border question (1918-1947). Wile E. Heresiarch 03:07, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - POV has never been a reason for deletion. If it is a real widely held concept (even if only in one country) then it should be fixed. -  T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  03:08, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Apparently nobody's been able or willing to NPOV this article since the last time we discussed it. MK 05:18, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. The new version of this article is almost ready anyway and there were no new serious changes to the old version since the last time. Halibutt 09:20, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unsuitable title, some factual content but so jumbled with other stuff it's easier to start again = no useful content. These facts are presented as evidence for a viewpoint, not as information. The new version appears to have a different title, cross that bridge when we come to it. Andrewa 10:29, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a platform for political discussion. If the article Poland's betrayal by the Western Allies survives, anyone can also create new articles Serbia's betrayal by the Russians, Belgium's betrayal by the Western Allies, Italy's betrayal by the Western Allies, Austria's betrayal by the Germans and so on. --Irredenta 11:30, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Leaving aside the issue of whether this particular article belongs in this encyclopdeia, I disagree with the premise of the OP. Britain and France made a promise to Poland and kept it; they declared war on Germany as they said they would. Britain fought for six years and France was occupied; certainly neither nation made a token commitment. No military alliance can guarantee victory. Why should these countries be condemned as betrayers for attempting too much? MK 15:06, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep/cleanup. There is excellent information in this article, but the title and a few parts are too POV. Make NPOV, and move to Polish border question (1918-1947). Also use Halibutt's new article under its own title  &mdash;siro&chi;o 01:31, Jul 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, or what Adam said. Halibutt's version is better than the current one, but still very problematic.  This is not an encyclopedic concept. john k 20:29, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Content is ok. [[User:Gdarin|gdarin (*-*) ]] 09:12, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)