Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Organic food
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 speedy keep WP:SK#2d as "nominations that are clearly an attempt to end an editing dispute through deletion, where dispute resolution is a more appropriate course". (non-admin closure) KTC (talk) 01:26, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Organic food (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
POV-article hijacked by the WP:MEDRS-guideline, ignoring other sources The Banner talk 00:50, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep please see WP:POINT, this is a bad-faith AFD nomination and should probably be speedy-closed.
Zad6800:57, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - The article is long and informative, a lot of people probably look up "Organic food", and I don't see why the article can't simply be heavily edited by other editors to replace everything objectionable.--RM (Be my friend) 00:57, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- You can't because it is hijacked with the WP:MEDRS guideline in hand. No matter what reliable sources you have relating to health and safety, it will be shot down as soon as it is not a medical source. The whole agricultural view of healthy food and food safety is bluntly ignored, making the article fundamentally flawed, one-sided and POV. The Banner talk 01:09, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep Definitely a bad faith nomination. AIRcorn (talk) 01:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep. Bad faith nomination by someone in a content dispute. Yobol (talk) 01:16, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep (winter wonderland clause) - mostly because AFD is not for clean-up or for NPOV enforcement. "Organic food" obviously passes notability standards and the article is backed by multiple reliable sources. If you think those sources are being given undue weight then have that conversation, by all means. But AFD is not the place for it. Stalwart111 01:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep bad faith nomination. Sfgiants1995 (talk) 01:24, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.