Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super Hornet Replacement Controversy


 * 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 Delete. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Super Hornet Replacement Controversy

 * — (View AfD)

This article reads like an advertisement for the F-14 combined with a conspiracy theory, and it utterly fails WP:POV. I have no particular investment in the Tomcat-vs-Super Hornet controversy at all, but the article does not fairly present it in any sense of the word. Improve at dead bottom minimum, but deletion may well be better. Iceberg3k 16:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - as per Iceberg3k, this is disgruntled editor placing an advert for the F14 Tomcat. The gist is correct but the article fails WP:POV miserably and would only survive with a neutral re-write.  Budgiekiller 16:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - A further problem with the article is that there is no "controversy," at least not on any level that matters. A "controversy" indicates that there is significant debate about it in the real world, which there has not been since before the Super Hornet entered service. Iceberg3k 16:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom. This was a POV fork from the main F-14 article, written in essay form and mostly uncited. Mostly WP:OR even the name is WP:POV. --Dual Freq 21:33, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Judgment? This seems to be a pretty straightforward case here, it's POV, badly formatted and uncited. Iceberg3k 19:37, 12 January 2007 (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.