Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AIDS myths and urban legends

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 05:21, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] AIDS myths and urban legends

Personal essay, highly POV, tagged disputed for a long time and no efforts to mediate or resolve have been successful. No references. The subject itself seems borderline encyclopedic, but the article is entirely not so. WP:ISNOT a soapbox nor is it a repository for original research. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 18:12, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep. The article is important and encyclopedic. VfD is not the place to complain about POV disputes. As far as I can see, this article desparately needs sources to resolve the disputes. Consider getting an administrator involved if things get nasty. Sdedeo 18:26, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. This article might need fixing (especially regarding NPOV) - but not beyond the point for deletion. --Hurricane111 21:22, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
• Very very very strong keep! The subject of the article is extremely important: the discrepancy between what is known about HIV/AIDS by the scientific community and what is believed by the general public is enormous. And, while Senator Frist doesn't seem to know the difference, an encyclopedia has an obligation to make that distinction. Most of the points in the article ought to be unquestionably verifiable, as long as editors are willing to do a little legwork. The POV and technical issues (like where to say HIV and where to say AIDS) can be cleaned up, but this article needs to stay. I would, however, recommend a move (with an appropriate redirect) to Common misconceptions about HIV and AIDS or somesuch to avoid the informal (bordering on incorrect) usage of the terms "myth" and "urban legend". - Che Nuevara, the Democratic Revolutionary 21:37, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

A move to such a page would be good. --Grcampbell 18:51, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. I would expect some urban myths and legends about HIV/AIDS to be strongly POV, we should be recording what those myths are, regardless of the strength of the POV those myths support. We could clearly state that on the page though. Alf 22:01, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep. Updated with some more myths/urban legends, seems a lot fuller now, and represents the mainline scientific consensus. --Grcampbell 23:07, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Has no original research --Grcampbell 20:34, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - If you are going to lead into a statement with FACT:, you better be able to multi-source your data. I think it is an excellent informational article on an important topic, however, I have to agree with Ryan Delaney that it is not encyclopedic. I would like to see a re-write that includes COMPLTELE sources for ALL statements. If the source was Pasteur et al., 1864 it would be fine, however, most of the sources are difficult to confirm without full names, publications, etc. And does it have to look like an 11th grade health class pamphlet? -PlainSight 02:46, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

References have been added. --Grcampbell 17:47, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

• Vote Change - KEEP - After format change and additional references. Nice work. -PlainSight 13:31, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

• Keep and wikify. --Apyule 04:43, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I want to see this fixed to encyclopedia standard, but the information in the article is solid, thorough, and worthwhile. A. J. Luxton 07:07, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
• Strong keep . Topic (title) is noteworthy. Manik Raina 07:40, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and wikify - there are tons of authoritative sources for this material, someone just has to dig it out and update the article. I have friends at the Gay Men's Health Crisis in NYC, I will contact them and see if they can help- --Outlander 14:36, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep --Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 11:10, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Lots of useful information, though it may need to be cleaned up NRS11 23:09, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
• Strong keep --Phroziac ^(talk) 02:53, 27 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.