Deletion of Criticism of American foreign policy

Comment: clean up. At least three editors on o original research/Noticeboard#Criticism of American foreign policy is huge .28200kb.29 POV.2FOriginal research essay|No original research/Noticeboard seem to share the view that the article might be improved through regular editing. Foreign policy of the United States now only contains a brief summary of the subject and is already almost 80kb long. It used to be 140kb long before the split (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_policy_of_the_United_States&oldid=342566781). According  and #Article spinouts – "Summary style" articles, the existence of this sub-article is completely justified. I agree that the article has some major issues, but it covers a highly notable subject and it certainly doesn't look like a blatant POV fork that needs to be deleted right away. It's probably the first time I saw a "Criticism of ..." article that tries to maintain a neutral perspective. See: Talk:Criticism of American foreign policy, Talk:Foreign policy of the United States#Split this article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:SIZERULE||WP:CFORK)

Comment: The whole premise of having a neutral article with arguments in list form is flawed, especially if there are so many different arguments. Some of the more well-sourced parts of this page concern topics that already have articles where the text would be more appropriate. I don't see how an article that fits the title could be written that is ''not'' . Besides, at 189 KB it's almost twice as long as the limit for almost certainly requiring a split according 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP||WP:SIZERULE)

Comment: The scope of the article is too wide and the current content seems contrary to , starting with a bizarre apologia.  I recently learnt that the early USA spent much of its Federal budget paying tribute to the Barbary pirates.  This seems remarkably supine and so I suppose there's criticism of this to be found.  Balancing such material in a giant omnibus article is beyond us
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP)