Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amir Massoud Tofangsazan (2nd nomination)
Wanting to "set our sights on being great" is not a justification for ignoring policy. The "little house rules" are, presumably, there for a reason - so they should apply equally to everyone and every article. There is no policy which says "Wikipedia has a social responsibility to do good for the world". It's a neutral encyclopedia that reports verifiable fact - that's what NPOV is all about. And as for calling it "sub-tabloid tittle-tattle" and "cruft", isn't that a classic example of ? #Notability_is_not_subjective|Notability is not based on Wikipedia editors' subjective judgements. I just don't see which policy you're referring to in arguing for deletion
— User:Walton, 20:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:N (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)