Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of the United States government

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 was keep. AfD is not for clean-up. Tone 22:33, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of the United States government[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article has a very poor quality and is full of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH violations as well as some WP:WEASEL violations. The article reads like an essay. Proposing deletion per WP:TNT. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. 1990'sguy (talk) 21:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. 1990'sguy (talk) 21:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article is well-referenced (50) and clearly meets the general notability guideline. None of the given reasons (poor quality, original research, synthesis, weasel words etc) are valid for deletion; rather, they suggest that the article be improved. It gets good readership averaging 92 pageviews per day. Keep it; fix it.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 22:37, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's full of cites and not exactly short. XeroxKleenex (talk) 09:38, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: While this article really could use a lot of help, and I completely understand why the nom is citing WP:TNT as rationale for deletion, I don't think it's a lost cause and there is useful information here for the "average reader". Hopefully someone will spend some time to clean this up a bit. Waggie (talk) 01:03, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per the others. That being said, the article definitely needs to be improved. Foxnpichu (talk) 22:01, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - AfD is not for clean-up. There's plenty of good cites in the article. See WP:BEFORE. Bearian (talk) 18:31, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is an essay not an article. It is infinitely expandable as a topic because there is no meaningful scope to it. There could be legitimate articles exploring criticisms of America’s form of government and on US government policies on specific issues, but wrapping everything up into a general catch-all makes no more sense than an article on ‘criticism of pop stars’ or ‘criticism of ship captains.’

I agree the article's scope is blurry; you've clarified the article's essential problem. If kept, a new title could refine the scope, such as 'Structural criticism of the United States government'. Much of the current article is about this already. But the 'infinitely expandable' reason could be applied to anything; isn't the subject of 'Cats' infinitely expandable? What's more important is whether the topic worthy of expansion. My sense is that it is.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 10:18, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.