Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of groups referred to as cults (5th nomination): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:04, 28 April 2007

List of groups referred to as cults

Procedural listing. Correcting malformed nomination by Kkrystian. Serpent's Choice 09:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See also Previous AFD, closed "no consensus, edging towards keep" on 16 June 2006. Serpent's Choice 09:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is a totally-sourced list that follows a stringent criteria developed by editors over several years. It is stable, with only small changes made and no recent notable edit wars. The list has survived several VfDs and AfDs. -Will Beback · † · 10:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Here are more previous deletion discussions:
Keep. Despite my being the procedural re-lister of this article, I do not find any POV issues that result in inherent inadmissability as an article. The article is in need of work; there are self-reference issues, and some very nonstandard formatting (plus the brightly-colored nonstandard warning label hatbox). But AFD is not cleanup, and the history of this article through a number of pagemoves and deletion discussions makes clear that something can and should be written on this topic. Serpent's Choice 10:28, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, well referenced, though I'm amused Wikipedia is on the list. --Candy-Panda 10:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- per references. Eaomatrix 11:19, 28 April 2007 (UTC)*Delete Youd have to place nearly every religion/group/institution out there in the world (AA is a cult?, Al Qaeda is a cult??... someones using the term too loosely here), so far this only seems to cover a western view on the matter (all sources are from western media). This is the kind of article that becomes chaotic from so many additions, not to mention being highly unreliable (it needs far more than just a couple of magazines as credible sources).[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions. -- Pax:Vobiscum 14:53, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 *'''Keep'''.  Despite my being the procedural re-lister of this article, I do not find any POV issues that result in inherent inadmissability as an article.  The article is in need of work; there are [[WP:ASR|self-reference]] issues, and some very nonstandard formatting (plus the brightly-colored ''nonstandard'' warning label hatbox).  But AFD is not cleanup, and the history of this article through a number of pagemoves and deletion discussions makes clear that ''something'' can and should be written on this topic.  [[User:Serpent's Choice|Serpent&#39;s Choice]] 10:28, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''', well referenced, though I'm amused Wikipedia is on the list. --[[User:Candy-Panda|Candy-Panda]] 10:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
+*'''Keep'''- per references. [[User:Eaomatrix|Eaomatrix]] 11:19, 28 April 2007 (UTC)*'''Delete''' Youd have to place nearly every religion/group/institution out there in the world (AA is a cult?, Al Qaeda is a cult??... someones using the term too loosely here), so far this only seems to cover a western view on the matter (all sources are from western media). This is the kind of article that becomes chaotic from so many additions, not to mention being highly unreliable (it needs far more than just a couple of magazines as credible sources).
-*'''Keep'''- per references. [[User:Eaomatrix|Eaomatrix]] 11:19, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 *<small>'''Note''':  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists|list of Lists-related deletions]].  </small> -- [[User:Pax:Vobiscum|Pax:Vobiscum]] 14:53, 28 April 2007 (UTC)