Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Family values

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, incredibly notable term in American politics --Cyde↔Weys 13:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Family values

Speculation, point-of-view and original research. The term is near-impossible to define in a NPOV manner due to the wide range of values it can possibly represent. michael ^talk 14:41, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete This article appears to be too hard to keep as a NPOV. --Tarpy 18:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Just because it is had does not mean that it shouldn't be attepmted. Even if it takes many attempts. Spewin 14:53, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Be careful to reference everything. Rick Norwood 15:15, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, the subject justifies an article. - Motor (talk) 15:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Important topic, actively edited article with references, I don't see any problem. --JJay 15:29, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete Very much per nom. — WCityMike ^(T | C)  ⇓ plz reply HERE  (why?) ⇓  17:19, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Article isn't perfect, and is US-centric, but the topic is worth having an entry on. --Coroebus 17:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, conditional upon extensive cleanup, POV scrubbing and making the article about what various people might consider "family values" and what that terms means to those people and how they make use of it. Peyna 19:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Basically a WP:OR. Neutrally sourced parts, if any, could be merged into Value (personal and cultural). Crum375 19:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Certainly a common political topic. More work can be done on the article re POV but a notabel topic nonetheless. Capitalistroadster 19:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This article is a complete soapbox. ER MD 19:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and move to Family values in U.S. politics. Rain74 19:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. No point in denying that the movement exists. Pollinator 20:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and move to Family values in U.S. politics. Little here of relevance to the rest of the world. --Guinnog 22:02, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and move to Family values in U.S. politics. Also address POV issues as does appear to be biased! --manchesterstudent 22:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and move to Family values in U.S. politics per previous. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as original research. -- Kjkolb 01:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Good explanation of political views.--Bud 03:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and broaden to include other countries (especially the Muslim world, where there is an analogous conflict between secular and religious candidates). Calwatch 06:56, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Unsalvagable leftwing soapbox article--RCT 19:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, but work on a near-complete rewrite. Important to have an article on, but this is completely insane as currently written. --badlydrawnjeff talk 20:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete--James Bond 20:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep - It's an entirely notable term. If there are POv issues, let's fix them, but there's no excuse whatsoever for deletion. Al 04:05, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and expand - Very well written encyclopedia article. — CJewell (talk to me) 13:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. This article is in common use among conservatives and even others, it deserves to stay here; however, that is not to say it should not be edited to fit NPOV. Эйрон Кинни (t) 22:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, even with the inherent NPOV pitfalls. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 18:44, 8 June 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.