Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Vladimir Putin: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:41, 29 December 2008 editRussavia (talk | contribs)78,741 edits →Criticism of Vladimir Putin: rsp← Previous edit Revision as of 18:28, 29 December 2008 edit undoAmwestover (talk | contribs)1,262 edits →Criticism of Vladimir Putin: DeleteNext edit →
Line 12: Line 12:
*'''Keep''' or merge. As per ]: "Since what qualifies as a "POV fork" is itself based on a POV judgement, do not refer to forks as "POV" except in extreme cases of persistent disruptive editing." Has there been "extreme cases of disruptive editing" in this case? If not the POV Fork argument has no merit<br>Further, criticism articles are common, and are not considered POVforks ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] I could go on, wikipedia list 152 pages, but I think the point has been adequately made. ] (]) 17:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC) *'''Keep''' or merge. As per ]: "Since what qualifies as a "POV fork" is itself based on a POV judgement, do not refer to forks as "POV" except in extreme cases of persistent disruptive editing." Has there been "extreme cases of disruptive editing" in this case? If not the POV Fork argument has no merit<br>Further, criticism articles are common, and are not considered POVforks ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] I could go on, wikipedia list 152 pages, but I think the point has been adequately made. ] (]) 17:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
:Thank you for the long list of ]. And have you taken a look at them? How many of them have their ]? (and rightly so). How many contain vast amounts of ]. Or are absolute merge candidates? How many are full of any titbit taken from some newspaper on some non-notable topic? Should I go on? Because the ] argument is not valid. Every article has to be judged on its own merits, and that is why I have nominated this, instead of simply re-directing, for the reasons provided to Biophys above. --] <sup>]</sup> 17:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC) :Thank you for the long list of ]. And have you taken a look at them? How many of them have their ]? (and rightly so). How many contain vast amounts of ]. Or are absolute merge candidates? How many are full of any titbit taken from some newspaper on some non-notable topic? Should I go on? Because the ] argument is not valid. Every article has to be judged on its own merits, and that is why I have nominated this, instead of simply re-directing, for the reasons provided to Biophys above. --] <sup>]</sup> 17:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. All ''Criticism of *'' articles are POV forks that should be deleted since all are deliberate attempts to circumvent NPOV, and frequently use biased sources. Misplaced Pages's purpose is not to characterize content positively or negatively, it's to present notable information in a neutral voice. If people want to read biased interpretations of people, places, events, theories, etc. then they can read biased media. --<font face="Arial Black">] (]|])</font> 18:28, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:28, 29 December 2008

Criticism of Vladimir Putin

Criticism of Vladimir Putin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This is a WP:POVFORK of Vladimir Putin in which information which is already present in the main article is cherry picked and placed in this article. As it is criticism it is never going to be possible to achieve WP:NPOV. Criticism should be covered in the main article, presented in an NPOV way, not in a POVFORK such as this. Russavia 12:18, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep. No, we do not have most of this information in his BLP article. His BLP article is already too big and therefore should be divided to smaller pages (see WP:MOS). We currently have 10+ "criticism" of living person articles.Biophys (talk) 15:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Apart from your WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, the section Civil liberties and internal dissent is present at Vladimir_Putin#Criticism. Allegations of political assassinations and muzzling of reporters is present at Vladimir_Putin#Second_term_.282004_.E2.80.93_2008.29. Relations with "oligarchs" is present at Vladimir_Putin#Second_term_.282004_.E2.80.93_2008.29. Environmental concerns is present at Vladimir_Putin#Environmental_record. Bubble is not criticism (and hence I will remove it). Relations with former Soviet Republics is present at Vladimir_Putin#Foreign_policy. Personal wealth is present at Vladimir_Putin#Personal_wealth. And they are available word-for-word. Check it for yourself, Criticism of VVP article as of now; VVP article as of now. I have already started a clean-up of the VVP article, and will likely work on it more in the coming days, and it will be much reduced in size. That still does not address the fact that Criticism of Vladimir Putin is a WP:POVFORK, with identical content to the main article, which has been cherry picked by some editor, and which is not WP:NPOV, nor will it be POV...that is a major policy here on WP. --Russavia 16:02, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Also, to point out from Talk:Criticism_of_Vladimir_Putin, User:Ender78 states "I just copy-pasted the contents of the original article in creating this one, so that there'd be a place for fuller exploration of the contra- viewpoint."....as I said, it's been cherry-picked from the original article in order to create a WP:POVFORK. --Russavia 16:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the long list of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. And have you taken a look at them? How many of them have their neutrality disputed? (and rightly so). How many contain vast amounts of WP:OR. Or are absolute merge candidates? How many are full of any titbit taken from some newspaper on some non-notable topic? Should I go on? Because the WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument is not valid. Every article has to be judged on its own merits, and that is why I have nominated this, instead of simply re-directing, for the reasons provided to Biophys above. --Russavia 17:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. All Criticism of * articles are POV forks that should be deleted since all are deliberate attempts to circumvent NPOV, and frequently use biased sources. Misplaced Pages's purpose is not to characterize content positively or negatively, it's to present notable information in a neutral voice. If people want to read biased interpretations of people, places, events, theories, etc. then they can read biased media. --Amwestover (talk|contrib) 18:28, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Categories: