Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Climategate scandal
while ''I don't agree with the title'' I think the idea of the page is what is important.  The editors at Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident have repeatedly pronounced that that article is about the hacking incident and have been committed to removing material that falls outside the scope of the hacking incident.  As a result, that article has a ''very'' strong focus on the hacking incident that really isn't reflective of the weight it is given in .  Therefore it makes sense that a page should be devoted to covering the public controversy (as opposed to a controversy about the science) / fall out that since ensued.  Its clear that this page should be kept.  I also am befuddled with editors who, on one hand, wish to restrict the Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident page to the hacking incident yet come here and call this a POV fork.  It seems fishy
— User:jheiv, 08:46, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)