Deletion of Criticism of George W. Bush (2nd nomination)

Comment: Per : "Sections of long articles should be spun off into their own articles leaving a summary in its place."  This is an appropriate daughter article, without which the properly encyclopedic discussion of criticism of Bush would overwhelm the main Bush bio
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Summary style (WP:SS)

Comment: a very |notable article, deletion reason is vague and unspecified
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Passes  with flying colours. Also, given that, "According to an August 2008 poll, 41% of Americans consider Bush to be the worst President of all time," the absence of this article would be glaring. If ''anyone'' has done enough to warrant a "criticism of" article, it would be Bush. (In contrast, a similar aticle about Obama--which, interestingly, the same nominator http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009_March_15&diff=277480292&oldid=277444116 put up for ''restoration'' at --would be horribly premature. So, to quote this very same nominator, "Criticisms are not inherently negative, they are critiques from differing perspectives - and many of these perspectives are notable. I would continue to work on the article, edit it, and make it more presentable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:WELLKNOWN||WP:DRV)

Comment: This article is too long to merged into the main Bush article and a merge discussion to another article is in progress. Spinning this off into its own page was a valid application of 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Splitting (WP:SPLITTING)

Comment: Criticism of Barack Obama should be unprotected from recreation (I believe semi-protection would be OK). Wikipedia is getting hammered in the press for perceived disparities between our treatment of George W. Bush and Barack Obama http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/wikipedia/4965132/Barack-Obama-receives-preferential-treatment-on-Wikipedia-report-claims.html Barack Obama 'receives preferential treatment on Wikipedia', report claims - Guardian (UK). Of course,  and  must be observed, but full protection over public criticism of President of the United States
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE||WP:V)