Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal Dutch Shell safety concerns
after reading the page, the main reason to delete seems to stem simply from . It attacks Shell but those attacks uses actual news reports. Obviously without Shell's response, the article is currently one sided, but the point is...the page uses verifiable references that are from respectable news sources. The only thing this page is guilty of is a lack of balance. A simple tag can solve that not deletion. If pages, based on legitimate sources are going to be removed because they make unpalatable commentary. What does that say about Wikipedia? For example the Catholic sex abuse cases article is based entirely on negative news reports concerning events. It is not listed for deletion as an attack page on the world's largest Christian religion. If Wikipedia is to going have policies then they should be applied fairly and consistently. It would also seem to me that the need to delete is based more on who the article's author is and not what they are saying. As a neutral, I just read the page and made my own judgement. It needs work but it doesn't need to be deleted. —Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/86.169.4.232|86.169.4.232
— [[User talk:86.169.4.232|talk]]), 11:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:IDL (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)