Deletion of Climate change denial (4th nomination)

Comment: Note the current lede sentence of the article: "Climate change denial is a term, generally pejorative, used to describe views that downplay the extent of global warming, its significance, or its connection to human behavior." In other words the subject of this article is a pejorative term used by persons on one side of a debate to discredit those on the other side. The existence of such a term might warrant a paragraph or two in an article about the overall controversy, but not an article of its own. We don't have separate articles on "Obamacare" or "Climategate" or other such coined pejoratives. Contrast with Holocaust denial, which is a crime in some jurisdictions. The rest of the article is essentially a  for allegations against individuals and organizations based essentially on opinion articles that use the term denial. There's even a section arguing an analogy to the tobacco industry. Also note that there is no AfD tag on the article at the moment.(fixed, thanks
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK)

Comment: This topic is not a POV fork; if it has POV in it, then fix those spots. This topic has been covered extensively in the media, and in research. Climate change denial has become a trend, and as the article states, has affected the political debate on the subject. There is no reason that such a topic cannot be covered neutrally, and it would most likely be |undue weight to try to cover it completely in other climate change articles. The lowdown: climate change denial is a broad movement that has been covered in the press extensively, so it meets , and as to it being a POV fork, the article has some issues, especially in the lead, and yet, both sides of this argument are covered in the article. It does not try to say that climate change denial is correct, merely that it exists, how it may have come about, and how it affects the world. Cheers
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE||WP:NOTE)

Comment: As per numerous editors above.  A |pointy nomination of a well-sourced topic seemingly in response to the parallel nomination of a badly-sourced, POV-fork neologism
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT)

Comment: In light of Climate change consensus, Climate change denial is an appropriate subject discussed by a number of  sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: as a bad faith nomination, per http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Climate_change_exaggeration&diff=347454280&oldid=347454220 this.  There are problems with this article, but this is just making
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT)

Comment: No question about it, or everything else in :Category:Denialism would have to go too. y nom, discussed mostly by our current crop of people who do things like this
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT)

Comment: Well sourced, relevant, notable. Article has survived three previous  nominations, and the nomination appears to be a  and  nomination from the Climate change exaggeration deletion nomination, as suggested by the nominator's above request and comments on the other nomination page. Framing Climate change exaggeration and Climate change denial as equals goes against , and we don't have a Holocaust exaggeration article for good reason
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:POINT||WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS||WP:UNDUE)

Comment: on two counts. First, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Climate_change_exaggeration&diff=347454280&oldid=347454220 frivolous nomination. Nominating an article for AFD so you can gather evidence to accuse people of hypocrisy is  to the max. (And no, I'm violating , since (1) this was the nominator's stated intention (see diff), and (2) he/she already asked people how their votes here compare to their votes there.) Second, this is an article that has already been here (''three times'') and this AFD presents ''absolutely no new evidence'' to support its deletion. &mdash
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT||WP:AGF)

Comment: as per others, nothing has changed from the last AfD's, and this nomination seems to have a   character, as well as a (poorly thought out)  to stall the AfD at CCE. As opposed to the CCE article: This article is well-defined, has a wide variety of reliable sources that explain and describe the subject ''directly'', all of which documents the notable character of the subject. It doesn't take a stand, but describes what secondary reliable sources state about the subject (as opposed to being a coatrack for POV
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:POINT)

Comment: Bad faith, tendentious nomination. Climate change denial covers a notable and well-documented topic, i.e. the issue of denialism as it applies to climate change, just as Holocaust denial and AIDS denialism cover denialism as it applies to those issues. The nominator's disruptive -scoring is a significant violation of the /CC|article probation regime in this topic area, but that's best dealt with elsewhere
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT||WP:GS)

Comment: as an "advocacy article" of the first water.  See dvocacy articles
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A)

Comment: This discussion has become less a deletion debate than a .  I suggest a quick cloture
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK)

Comment: obviously |notable, massively represented in |reliable sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RS)

Comment: w/ . If at first you don't succeed, try, try, try again eh
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)