Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scientology controversies
I agree with the nominator that the "Look how many sources this article has!" argument is detrimental to his case, and understand why he would set up a "straw man argument" in an attempt to discurage that line of thought.  I agree that with all the  already contained in the article, this article is not only notable, but has all the internal mechanisms neccisary to fix any problems within the article.  additionaly this article is a main page for a subset of scientology related articles so deleting it would (sorta, i understand I am misusing the word but I think it works) "orphin" a block of articles, and the redirect that was done by the nominator would have cramed even more information into the Scientology page, which is already huge.  also I don't believe that we should edit in fear of lawsuits, just in accordance to the law.  Perhaps the nominatior would like to review the law books (in the US. and the UK) and let us know exactly what stature he is worried about us beeing sued for
— User:Coffeepusher, 14:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)