Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trump–Russia dossier allegations
Your candor is appreciated, MelanieN - different perspectives are what contribute to the quality articles this encyclopedia strives to present - but as the nominator of this AfD, I disagree with what you've presented. because, quite frankly, it's reductio ad absurdum. I nominated this article - now a list - because it is an ATTACKPAGE that initially got its legs (tines?) as a POVFORK for all the reasons mentioned throughout this AfD. I'll add the fact that BuzzFeed is considered an unreliable source, and in this case, the only source that published the full dossier - is that the source being used for this list of allegations? According to BuzzFeed#Notable_stories, they are now facing 2 litigations as a result. We should also keep in mind that other news orgs declined publishing the full dossier and criticized BuzzFeed for doing so. The New York Times confirmed https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/10/business/buzzfeed-donald-trump-russia.html in this artice that they chose to publish generalized descriptions instead. For WP to separate certain allegations from the main article and publish them as a list with commentary is well...fill in the blanks. Opposition research by its very nature is an attack on a political opponent, and attempts to justify its validity as encyclopedic for no other reason than news organizations published articles/opinions/analysis about it (noting that  is only reliable for statements of fact) is ludicrous at best. WP is not a political SOAPBOX from which to "resist" or spread rumors and conspiracy theories by anonymous sources. I stand by my decision as nominator
— User:Atsme, 02:14, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:NEWSORG (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)