Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/U.S. list of state sponsors of international terrorism


 * 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. John Lake 04:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

U.S. list of state sponsors of international terrorism

 * — (View AfD)

How can this wreck of a page ever be NPOV? There isn't even a single source for this list, and why do we need to promote a single state's opinions about other states? --Nyp 06:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep or move to U.S. State Department list of state sponsors of international terrorism. I have a vague suspicion this could be bad faith, but I'll say no more on that. The US is the third largest nation in population and armed forces personnel so it's governmental reports do have global significance and notability. If India, China, or Russia have similar reports I'd think they also deserve attention.--T. Anthony 07:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment You are incorrect in regards of me doing this in bad faith, but have a look at the page itself. There is no source whatsoever to such a report, there are no sources for the accusations against the listed states, so in difference to the article Allegations of state terrorism by United States of America this article is pretty much only a promotion of these allegations and I cannot see a way to improve that. There are articles with allegations against certain states, we do not need an article with allegations by a certain state. --Nyp 07:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I disagree as the report(s) is notable. Whether it's accusations are fair or not is not important. The allegations or claims in the Parliamentary Commission about Cults in France or the Mazengarb Report need not be true in order for the report to be of historic significance.--T. Anthony 08:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I was not aware of the existence of these articles. Even though I agree with that they justify the existence of the article in question I still believe that a state's opinions should not be the subject of an article, but only be referenced to in articles about the subject that the opinions are about. --Nyp 08:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There's also Category:Government reports. No worries, the place is so big no one could be aware of all of it.--T. Anthony 09:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Move to U.S. State Department list of state sponsors of international terrorism.  Canadian - Bacon  07:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That would also be fine.--T. Anthony 07:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep As per T. Anthony. Akihabara 07:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I guess you can throw up your hands and send it to AFD or use "the Google" on "the Internets" and get this in a nanosecond: Terrorist Nations Why do you think its a wreck? Bad faith nom. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 08:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I have stated why I believe this article to be a wreck. If you disagree with my reasoning, it is your issue, not mine. --Nyp 08:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * And thank you for adding the references to the page. --Nyp 09:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep It wouldn't be NPOV if you knocked the "U.S." off the front, but it's fine to include the content as is. Endorse rename, as well.--Kchase T 08:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Re: renaming: It's a minor point, but since we're renaming, State actually calls it "State Sponsors of Terrorism" (sans "international"), though they obviously are international. Any thoughts on this?--Kchase T 08:36, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep but I agree it should be renamed. DelPlaya 08:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Undeniably a notable subject. Obviously needs the proper sources, etc. I have no problem with renaming it, though I personally see no problem with the current title since such a listing is driven by the U.S. 23skidoo 14:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per Anthony FirefoxMan 16:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I believe the subject is notable and useful enough. Also support the renaming. TSO1D 21:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, easily notable enough, it seems to be rather common knowledge since I heard it on the news whenever Libya or Iran was mentioned. I too have no problem with the name, although am not prejudiced to a name change if consensus agrees on a better one. hateless 22:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Rename I think that even the people who place nations on this list would be very willing to call it "The US State Department list..." or possibly "The US Government list ..." That's what is is, and thats what it say it is. Nobody would claim it represents general opinion; it is not even intended to, it is intended to represent the expert opinion of the compilers. And I suppose it does. How many other people in the US would say it represents their opinions is another matter, but that would be OR. DGG 02:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep or move to U.S. State Department list of state sponsors of international terrorism (Liveforever22 03:01, 15 December 2006 (UTC))
 * Keep has the nominator even worked on this article? Travb (talk) 05:35, 18 December 2006 (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.