Deletion of Climate change denial (3rd nomination)

Comment: a POV fork based on |synthesis and dubious sources. Anything of value in that article already exists at Global warming controversy. '''~ AmeIiorate
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: with prejudice as the subject is undoubtably and verifiably notable (there is a well established denial community, not unlike Holocaust denial and others). Even if it were a Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#POV_forks|POV fork this rticle size|article size alone (>40k) already nearly justifies Wikipedia:Splitting|splitting and global warming controversy almost certainly should be divided at 150k. Future nominations should be promptly closed too
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A)

Comment: Nominator falsely claims that the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Climate_change_denial_(2nd_nomination)|last AfD debate was http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Climate_change_denial_(2nd_nomination)&diff=201450644&oldid=201447382 withdrawn ''within an hour'' when in fact it survived http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Climate_change_denial_(2nd_nomination)&action=history 3 hours, 40 minutes and attracted 9 keep votes and 1 merge with no deletes. They quickly withdrew because ''Stephan made a convincing argument how this article can be made to be am NPOV, balanced accounting of this somewhat controversial theory'' and had a |snowball's chance in hell of prevailing anyway. The debate happened anyway (contrary to what is implied here) and invariably would have been a '''Keep''' result
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: This is not about scientists disagreeing. This is about a "denial industry" which has no regard for evidence, much like Holocaust denial. This denial industry has been written about in reliable sources with substantial coverage, satisfying 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: the first two voters http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle&diff=prev&oldid=231995284 have http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Climate_change_denial&diff=prev&oldid=182341622 history with this topic and it's not surprising that the next two followed the flow. With a dozen or so ''Keep'' votes in a row we can't be far off invoking |SNOW now
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: per previous AfD and plentitude of verifiable sources. Also, I sense some 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)