Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dacha

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 of the debate was Keep by popular demand - CrazyRussian talk/email 02:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dacha

This article is untruthful, incomplete, biased to overestimate the poor conditions and poverty in Russia, and lacks citations

  • Strong Delete This article lacks validity and neutrality. --GoOdCoNtEnT 01:05, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Article looks intentionally biased to degrade the image of the Russian culture on Wikipedia. --Space Mistral 01:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Super Keep just short of Speedy Keep: untruthful is a naked assertion with which I disagree, incomplete is not a deletion rationale, biased to overestimate - doubt it very much, but you can feel free to slap {{fact}} on any assertion you dislike, and yeah, it could use a few more sources - but so could everything here. This nom is silly. - CrazyRussian talk/email 01:23, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. AfD is not the forum for these sorts of issues. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 01:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep -- if you think it's inaccurate or incomplete, edit it. NawlinWiki 01:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per above. —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-07 01:39Z
  • Keep Per above. *~Daniel~* ☎ 01:40, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Dachas are notable. Quality of the article doesn't merit an AfD. ~ trialsanderrors 01:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep per Trialsanderrors. CaptainVindaloo t c e 02:06, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep At least the overview is accurate and NPOV. I can't personally attest to all the claims about plot size and governemtn ownership but their is no basis to delete the article rather than clean it up. Eluchil404 02:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep This needs a copy edit but that is no reason to delete it. -- Alias Flood 02:09, 7 July 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.