Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evolution controversy

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was REDIRECT to creation-evolution controversy. Robert 19:27, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Evolution controversy

This is a POV rewrite/fork of creation-evolution controversy by Ed Poor (talk · contribs) (who ought to know better) intended to reflect his own religious views because the current article at creation-evolution controversy doesn't. Dunc|☺ 18:16, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Author should focus on current page.Gator1 19:05, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
• I'd vote Redirect to creation-evolution controversy if someone hadn't already done it. --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 21:33, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't know that your private term POV rewrite means.

• Are you saying that the article is biased? If so, please show in what way it is biased.
• Are you saying that no points of view should be described in the article. If so, that is a challenge to the NPOV policy, which says that all points of view should be described fairly.

Without a clear re-statement of your objection, this is not a valid AFD request. It's just an opinion poll, and its tally should be disregarded. Uncle Ed 22:58, 28 September 2005 (UTC) A great big thank you to all who have pitched in to explain your objections. I understand now. Uncle Ed 14:41, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

• Redirect this fork back to whence it came. Thryduulf 23:03, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect fork back to main page. Re-writes should either be in user subpage, or on subpage of main article. Guettarda 23:04, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to creation-evolution controversy. I did revert a previous redirect of this page, but only because I think it should be left as is until a consensus is achieved on the Afd. I see no good reason to fork off and create a new PoV article just because you can't agree on the neutrality of the original. --GraemeL ^(talk) 23:06, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect as per Thryduulf .--Apyule 02:23, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. Any problems with creation-evolution controversy should be solved at that page, not via a fork. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 03:42, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to creation-evolution controversy. I, too, am surprised that the article's creator would fork an article in this manner. — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:02, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. As clumsy as the term is, "POV fork" precisely defines what's being attempted here, and it's unacceptable behavior. --FOo 04:38, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to creation-evolution controversy, forking articles is not the way to deal with NPOV disputes. --Stormie 05:58, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect - while theoretically a controversy could arise around evolution, aside from the evolution-creationism thing, this article is currently useless, obvious POV, obvious fork, and as such simply confusing the issue. -- Ec5618 06:07, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect as above. --Carnildo 06:17, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect as clear fork, redundant article. DreamGuy 06:18, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect Everyking 09:26, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect the fork. Joshuaschroeder 13:53, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• I think there's been enough votes to see where this is going - SPEEDY redirect by the way - could a nice admin close this, please. Muchas gracias. Proto t c 15:14, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

  The AfD process can't be cut short before the minimum time is up (there might be a shipload of people about to vote "keep"...). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:45, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

  It does happen - an admin can be bold to reduce clog. The closing can always be undone by any admin if there is any protest (which almost never happens, as admins usually make sensible decisions about when to close early) Proto t c 11:33, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete & redirect as per everyone else — a clear PoV fork. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:45, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and/or redirect Vsmith 15:53, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. Ed, if you want to publish your essays, get your own website for them. --Calton | Talk 03:58, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. BlankVerse ∅ 11:13, 3 October 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.