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.
Presbyterian Church USA was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep.
For: This article is hopelessly biased. The author of it gives a very short sketch of what the PCUSA is, and then proceeds to discuss nothing but criticism of the church or actions that members of the church have taken of which the author thinks readers will disapprove. Though the material about controversies concerning Israel and other matters should definitly be included, it seems clear that the author of this page is interested in writing an anti PCUSA screed, not an encyclopedia article. If he or she wants to do this, I'm certainly not stopping him/her, but Wikipedia is not the place for such a screed. The article is so flawed as to be almost useless now -- if it is not to be deleted, it will need to be rewritten from the ground up, so to speak.Zantastik 05:57, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Send to Cleanup and keep. There is quite a lot of bias but it's a good subject for an encyclopedia and the article body does contain the germ of a good article. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 06:29, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Keep and cleanup. POV is a reason for fixing the article, not for deleting it. It's a valid article subject. 18.104.22.168 09:13, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC) - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 09:14, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC) (oops, session timed out)
Rip it up. It looks like Wiki-mess. The first paragraph of it is a nice introduction (except that the article goes way out of its way to avoid saying that the Presbyterian Church is the Puritains), and then all the anti-PC stuff starts up -- tacked on by unhappy campers. Blank everything from "Person of Jesus" on and rewrite. The topic is not inherently POV. If there is an edit war or a revert war, I'm sure we can resolve it with RfC or protection. Geogre 14:56, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Keep and cleanup. Encyclopedic topic, some good information, no grounds for deletion. Andrewa 16:11, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Send to Cleanup. My criteria: Is the subject deserving of an entry? Yes. Is it poorly written? Yes. (Clearly by someone with an axe to grind over Israeli issues -- that section is larger than the history section, which deserves more attention.) Fix and expand instead of erasing it; it should be in any comprehensive encyclopedia. Katefan0 16:42, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
Keep and cleanup. Again, VfD is not Cleanup! [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 17:18, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Keep. This article has been around since Feb 2002 and was uncontroversial for most of that time. It has many links on "what links here" demonstrating that this is a strongly requested topic. Reviewing the history, I conclude that it has only beein in recent months that the comments accused of being partisan screed were added. Disputes over NPOV and content should be resolved through the regular processes. This article definitely does not need to be rewritten from the ground up (though it may appropriate to revert to an earlier version). Rossami(talk) 18:08, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Keep and cleanup.There could be a useful article hidden in there somewhere... P Ingerson 00:33, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Up until you get to the whole Israel thing (no doubt related to recent events regarding the Presbyterian "divestment" issue), it is a useful article. I'm not sure about the "Person of Jesus" section either, but I'm not familiar enough with Presbyterianism enough to comment on that. Keep and NPOV. Inky 00:58, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Keep. I have deleted most of the stuff about Israel except for a sentence on the divestment decision by the General Assembly and put it with the stuff on homosexual ordination and gun control in a section called current discussion in the Church. I have removed entirely the section on the person of Jesus. I have added sections on the structure of the church and an extensive section on the history of the Church. Capitalistroadster 06:34, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
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.