Deletion of Communist propaganda

Comment: Notice how we have American propaganda.  Most of the arguments are either |IDONTLIKEIT or arguments that can be solved by other means (i.e, NPOV status of current article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: The article is a POV-fork. The concept of "propaganda" is conflated with various irrelevant facts and the article constitutes several . The article uses several biased sources like Robert Conquest, David Satter who are well know for anti-communist activities. The Black Book of Communism is a horribly biased and staunch anti-Communist source. Overall the article is full of quotes from some books and opinions of some biased academics, and the western concept of "propaganda" is conflated with different irrelevant political and ideological activities
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN)

Comment: WP:GOOGLE is not the way to establish |notability
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: from someone who has read plenty of books and articles that address this topic.  This article is called "Communist propaganda," not "Soviet propaganda."  I can't speak for others who voted delete, but I'd have no problem with an article on "Soviet Propaganda," which is clear and specific.  "Communist" propaganda, however, is not clear or specific, and the grouping of various kinds of propaganda here is artificial and smacks of .  Based on your argument, you should be advocating a '''merge''' with Soviet propaganda, not a "strong keep
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN)

Comment: Do I sense some kind of propaganda wit hthis article? This is a serious violation of POV. Propaganda is part of life. It is called advertising, spread of ideas, etc. All the things the article uses to explain why "communist propaganda" is something special is a serious violation of POV. Which of the things that violate POV to mention first? "Use of Marxist ideology"? "Indoctrination of children"? "Propaganda of extermination"? If there is something interesting in this article certainly can be merged to History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. If someone wants to make its  there are better ways this kind of articles
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT)

Comment: You need to justify your "keep" vote. The article has concerns with RS and . Marxism is conflated with the concept of "propaganda". You need to address these issues
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN)