Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arian controversy
The nom failed to make an appropriate rationale per  so it doesn't matter. I would point out that WP:POTENTIAL is just an essay and I'd counter with . That said, the subject is notable, the content is cited, and the citations are verifiable with a couple trips to the library. It's an ugly article and re-creates most of what Arianism already covers but I don't think there's a  argument here. I'd prefer to see an interested editor |userfy this mess and re-work it but that isn't likely. The problem with inclusionism is that !voting ''keep'' while admitting the article has real shortfalls results in subpar articles. Deletionism removes the offending content and there's no mess left to clean up
— User:Chris, 19:00, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:DEL||WP:JUNK||WP:NUKEANDPAVE||WP:USERFY (Wikipedia:Deletion policy)