Deletion of Global warming controversy (2nd nomination)

Comment: I don't see that the article violates the  policy even if the opinions expressed by the subjects quoted are not neutral
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: The article is well referenced, there is good coverage of differing opinions (including, ''gasp'', international context) and in my view the tone of the article is relatively |POV free. Issues of sociology, including public opinion, controversy, media, politics, etc. are all eminently notable in addition to the scientific context. Where issues do exist they are best addressed on the article's talk page, or through |bold editing. I also note the overwhelming vote to keep in the last Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Global_warming_controversy|deletion debate and would politely suggest to the nom. that they may be pushing a |snowball up a very steep hill in this AFD discussion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:POV||WP:BOLD||WP:SNOWBALL)