Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liberalism

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 speedy keep. This article obviously should not be deleted. Besides, the nomination was not done properly (not transcluded in AfD page, no justification for nomination). -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:13, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP I assume the proposal by an anonymous user to delete the article on Liberalism is a form of spam. Rick Norwood 21:39, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP Therer are nog arguments written in favour of deletion. Electionworld 21:55, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is comprehensive and descriptive of a long and rich tradition of political thought that grossly misunderstood.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Derjea (talk • contribs) 22 Nov 2005
KEEP this is a great source and should not be deleted
KEEP Clearly the only arguement for deletion is disagreement with the political views it describes.
Strong Keep Liberalism is a major political ideology, with tonnes of factions. Canadianism 01:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP By "definition" liberalism is necessarily difficult to define in its emotional, "free inquiry, "open minded" intentions for liberation from both injustice, from "revealed knowledge", from traditional values, from absolutes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by At7300 (talk • contribs) 23 Nov 2005
Speedy Keep, and write up the individual who plastered the header for vandalism. This is time wasting nonsense and, at the very least, violates WP:Point. Stirling Newberry 03:25, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep, surely an administrator should be able to reject this type of deletion nonsense within a few minutes.
KEEP Baseless tag-trolling. Lucidish 04:37, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
SPEEDY Keep. Why not? This is an acknowledged and historic term. What next? Delete Communism? What dont I get?! IZAK 04:54, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP. "[T]he onus of proof is on him who asserts the positive." (quoting Leonard Peikoff's Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand, 1991, ISBN 0525933808, p. 167.) No case has been presented for removing the Liberalism page; therefore, the motion to delete it is arbitrary and should be dismissed. Peter Johnson [05:25, 23 November 2005 (UTC)].
Speedy keep. Is there any need to go on with this process? The person who proposed this for deletion did not even give a reason. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:09, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP This is just vandalism, in case it wasn't obvious. --Allstar86 10:15, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - for god's sake!? the person who voted to delete this is probably one of the people that uses the word "liberal" as an insult. --Phil 11:16, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Sppedy Keep changed from keep. I did not know about the speedy keep option before.

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.