Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Windows Vista (2nd nomination)

: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 Speedy keep WP:SNOW and WP:POINT. Synergy 15:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

=[[Criticism of Windows Vista]]=

AfDs for this article:

{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Windows Vista}}

:{{la|Criticism of Windows Vista}} ([{{fullurl:Criticism of Windows Vista|wpReason={{urlencode:AfD discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Windows Vista (2nd nomination)}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Criticism articles are nearly always POV forks, and should be deleted per the relevant guideline. Sceptre ^(talk) 13:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy keep for WP:POINT nominator SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
Keep - WP:POVFORK specifically states that "There is no consensus whether a "Criticism of .... " article is always a POV fork.". -- JediLofty ^User_Talk 14:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Keep - This (And the other articles) are notable enough to warrant separate topics about them. I don't see these article's as PoV forks, but rather as seperate articles to cover a certain aspect about the companies in question. These articles are simply to long to include into the main article, and are therefore forked. As far as i can see, the article comply to WP:NPOV more or less, and are properly sourced. Excirial^{(Talk,Contribs)} 14:38, 6 August 2008 (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.