Deletion of Political views of American academics

Comment: Fails  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTESSAY||WP:NPOV)

Comment: to academic bias, no merge. To me the telling sentence in the article, from the middle of a huge wall of text, is "Many of these researchers, according to Gross, have made "a number of poor methodological choices, as well as leaps of logic, because of their strong political commitments."" That the article then goes on to quote in detail piles of the same research, with no attempt at digesting it or summarizing it, and no attempt to distinguish Wikipedia's point of view from the mostly-politically-motivated points of view of the critics, makes it not worth saving as a  from the parent bias article. That academic bias is a notable topic is indisputable. That a specifically America-focused view on academic bias is notable as a subtopic of this topic also seems likely enough (although I question whether that's not what we already have in the parent article). But I can't make the jump from that truth to the salvageability of any content from the article as we have it now. And if it is to be an article about the political biases (not "views") of American academics, then the title is wrong. Or, if it is to be an article about the political views of American academics, then the current content is almost entirely off-topic, because there is nothing in the article that discusses the ways in which academic viewpoints on politics might be differentiated from the standard left-right spectrum that characterizes everyone else's viewpoints on politics. (Disclaimer: I am an academic, with viewpoints on politics that I try to keep out of my Wikipedia editing. But to try is not always to succeed
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:POVFORK)

Comment: WP:ESSAY isn't the applicable provision:  is
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTESSAY)

Comment: Well sourced, has received continued coverage since the 50's, and easily meets . If you think there are POV issues, you are welcome to improve the article. Otherwise that is not a reason for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: For editors who are new to the AfD process, the preferred terminology is "keep" or "delete", not "support" or "oppose".) There is no question that the page was created as a POV violation. But this is a  situation: the fact that it has been written in a POV manner does not mean that it cannot be written in an NPOV manner. (Note: I am not calling anything "ugly": that's a shortcut link.) The political views of university professors are an encyclopedic topic, and there has been more than enough written about it to establish notability. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is currently going through a period of editors using the editing process to proxy war over the current divisions in US politics
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:UGLY)