Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scandals of the 2004 Summer Olympics

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 and cleanup. Kimchi.sg 05:17, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scandals of the 2004 Summer Olympics[edit]

I think this a POV title which needs to be altered at the very least if the article stays because it inherently condemns the official outcome of the controversial events which are listed within in the article. Secondly, the "Officiating decisions" is inherently violating WP:OR and WP:NPOV in that it will be inherently selective and incomplete of the incidents which are considered to be "scandalous/controversial". For example, regarding Kitajima doing a dolphin kick in breaststroke, this was the most prominent as he was fighting with Hansen for the gold medal, but there were many other murmurs about all sorts of breaststrokes bending their legs underwater etc. Also the section on which gymnastics performances cannot possibly be POV. Perhaps the Drugs Tests section will stay, but should be changed to "Drug Testing at the 2004 Summer Olympics".ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 01:19, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Change name The name should most definitely changed, per nom it violates WP:NPOV & the "Officiating descisions" column needs to be removed or rewritten. --Srik e it^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 01:53, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The problems identified should be dealt with by bold editing, at Cleanup, or through some other appropriate process. I don't think the title is too bad, but would be happy if the nominator or someone else could offer a better one. Some word like "controversies" might be better than "scandals", but I think "scandal" has just come to mean that there was some sort of furore in the press - which is verifiable in principle. It doesn't necessarily mean that the wrong decision was made. In any event, we don't need to go to AfD just to change a title. The appropriate first port of call is the talk page. Metamagician3000 01:55, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep & rename with POV scrub. Plenty of good info here, if cleaning it up is too tricky then support reducing it to drugs testing only, per nom. Deizio 02:12, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, rename, and clean the text up. - Richardcavell 03:33, 1 May 2006 (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.