Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sexuality of Robert Baden-Powell (4th nomination)
I would usually !vote for a merge in such cases, but the Baden-Powell main article seems enough too long to allow that. The subject has been covered in several sources in detail, and as such there's no reason to delete it -we ought to report it. The subject is not living since long time, so  concerns are of course moot.  applies to articles individually, not to WP coverage: I agree it's quite quirky to see so much attention on Baden-Powell sexuality, but it's not to me or to anyone else to ''judge'' subjects of articles. It can be a fringe theory, but we ''do'' of course cover fringe theories extensively in Wikipedia, of course, if they're notable (provided they're presented as such an keeping NPOV). The fact that there are few or none other "Sexuality of X" articles it's a  argument and, if anything, only tell us that more articles like this one could be needed, if backed up by enough RS to merit an article in itself. In the end, what counts is if the subject has been covered by multiple independent RS. Since it is, it meets  and every other consideration -merging, trimming, etc.- can be dealt with editing, per |deletion policy and 
— User:Cyclopia, 13:46, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:BLP||WP:UNDUE||WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST||WP:GNG||WP:ATD||WP:PRESERVE (Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons)