275:: Exactly. Also, it creates more work for those trying to maintain NPOV, as they have to try to come to a consensus on multiple articles instead of just one. Finally, editors should be aware that a truly comprehensive biography on a person is not appropriate for an encyclopedia, even Knowledge (whether the biography consists of one article or multiple articles). For United States presidents, such a biography would consume a short book at the least since we know so much about them, relatively speaking. If the event (or situation, action or whatever) did not have a significant impact on the person or on the industry, nation, culture or society, there is a good possibility that it should not be included. --
330:
that. I ask, where is the evidence for that? This has been a remarkably quiet article, and I think is scrupulously neutral. If people are looking for a POV brawl, stick this back into the main articles and see what happens. That's exactly how this article got started, because the Selene
Walters and Juanita Broadrick articles were hotspots. I see a lot of opining about how this article causes more trouble than a merge by people whose names I don't recognize as being active contributors to those Presidential articles. The evidence points to the contrary. Jimbo is right about this: AFD is broken, long live AFD.
154:
present more detail without hijacking the presidential articles. One could separate these into four separate ones, but a unified article makes a more interesting read and provides context. Part of that context is, as you note, that most recent presidents have had allegations of this sort made, which likely speaks more about the current culture than about their characters.
311:
day and age) are always going to be accused of something as do virtually all celebrities, athletes, politicians etc. which means that without solid reasons there should be extra care taken with this sort of thing or we might as well devote half of the encyclopaedia to accusations made against well-known people.--
310:
gimme a break.... anything with "accusations" in the title automatically disqualifies itself from inclusion in an encyclopaedia where verifiable facts are the norm. Accuasations furthermore are ludicrous. Reagan and Bush as rapists? I won't even touch on the fact that these people (certainly in this
258:
List of allegations... give me strength. If these allegations are notable, then what is the problem with mentioning them on the article of the respective president? The only reason I would consider something like this worthy of its own article is if there was some kind of reason to believe that U.S.
216:
article already addresses the
Broaddrick allegation with a sentence or two. If the other two are truly worthy of mention, they'll be covered sooner or later. The extremely short intro to this article indicates that there is nothing in common about these various accusations to merit an article on
102:
the validity of any of these charges. It does provide a neutral and well-sourced exposition of them. The issue of
Jefferson and his slave is certainly speculation by its very nature, but this article does not speculate. It reports notable speculations and research of others; that's exactly what
329:
is verifiable. The article never suggests the alleged act did or was likely to have occured. So, removing the material has no basis in policy, nor does it serve the reader. There have also been lots of people worried that this article exists to promote POV or that it creates problems monitoring
153:
Comment: I'm not sure we want to devote a section of the various presidential articles to these allegations. While they are themselves notable, they are not central to the notability of those figures. Those articles should probably each contain one sentence with a pointer to this one which can
144:, this kind of thing should go into the articles on the presidents. Separating them out like this seems like an attempt to paint U.S. presidents as alleged rapists (I doubt that was the creator's intention, though), especially since there are only four presidents listed. --
229:
after merging any salvageable content into articles on individuals. Look, you wouldn't defend an article on "Accusations of rape against Bus
Drivers" would you? And if there were individual cases that were notable enough there would be articles
83:
259:
presidents are particularly prone to raping. Otherwise, it's just an excuse to list allegations, or for someone who has had his contributions thrown off presidential bioggraphies and decides to start his own article instead. -
320:
Are you suggesting that
Knowledge never mention that Juanita Broaddrick accused Clinton of rape, or that Anita Hill accused Clarence Thomas of harassment, or any other well-known allegations? Knowledge does not report what
325:. We report what people say is. That's the very cornerstone of the NPOV policy. The fundamental questions are whether the allegations are notable, yes as evidenced by media coverage, and verifiable, yes the
115:
per the last AfD. I just stumbled across the article and found it very interesting. I'd imagine it would qualify as notable, some of the most powerful men in history being involved.
94:. Perhaps the charges are ludicrous, almost certainly the most recent is (as the article makes fairly clear). They are also notable and well-known. The article does not
339:
I am suggesting that the first word of the article disqualifies it right then and there. Furthermore, Broaddrick (I am nor familiar with this particular case)
414:
402:
390:
378:
362:
334:
315:
302:
279:
267:
250:
238:
221:
200:
188:
176:
158:
148:
136:
124:
107:
73:
57:
132:. Interesting article, seemed well-sourced. That they are unproven is not a problem, since the subject of the article is specifically allegations.
69:
At least two of the four entries are ludicrous and a third (Jefferson) is POV and speculation which should be covered within the main article --
63:
343:, and I say that carefully, be worthy of inclusion considering Clinton's record. Hill's accusation played a large part in Thomas's
17:
429:
350:, making it notable. The rest of this article is again, filled with ludicrous accusations. Knowledge should imho
36:
428:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
120:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
375:
133:
116:
247:
208:
The articles on the president already include this material if it is worthy of being there. The
197:
70:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
290:
209:
331:
264:
155:
104:
49:
359:
312:
399:
387:
299:
185:
374:
Any notable allegations can be covered in the article about the relevant president.
411:
218:
217:
such accusations. This is a home for POV attacks, and has no hope of being more.
213:
276:
235:
169:
145:
260:
173:
212:
already has a subsection and two sub-articles about the Heming stuff. The
84:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Accusations of rape against U.S. presidents
234:, you know, just like we have articles on the individual presidents.
422:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
196:
I started this AfD, just thought I should vote officialy.--
64:
Accusations of rape against United States presidents
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
432:). No further edits should be made to this page.
354:report everything people say. Also, the term
8:
168:and send content to individual articles per
7:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
246:and add more illustrations. --
1:
103:Knowledge is supposed to do.
82:Has been through AFD before.
44:The result of the debate was
410:this please per the others
449:
415:20:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
403:01:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
391:01:24, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
386:Per comments by Derex. --
379:15:38, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
363:22:01, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
335:20:43, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
316:19:57, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
303:13:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
280:12:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
268:10:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
251:06:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
239:04:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
222:02:09, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
201:01:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
189:01:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
177:00:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
159:01:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
149:23:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
137:21:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
125:21:07, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
108:01:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
74:02:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
58:20:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
425:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
121:Cæsar is turn’d to hear
345:character assasination
184:for above reasons. --
298:Agree with Motor. ---
358:springs to mind.--
123:
440:
427:
210:Thomas Jefferson
134:David L Rattigan
119:
55:
52:
34:
448:
447:
443:
442:
441:
439:
438:
437:
436:
430:deletion review
423:
232:on those people
67:
53:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
446:
444:
435:
434:
418:
417:
405:
398:per others. -
393:
381:
369:
368:
367:
366:
365:
305:
293:
284:
283:
282:
253:
248:Chris Griswold
241:
224:
203:
191:
179:
163:
162:
161:
139:
127:
117:CanadianCaesar
110:
88:
87:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
445:
433:
431:
426:
420:
419:
416:
413:
409:
406:
404:
401:
397:
394:
392:
389:
385:
382:
380:
377:
376:Ace of Sevens
373:
370:
364:
361:
357:
353:
349:
346:
342:
338:
337:
336:
333:
328:
324:
319:
318:
317:
314:
309:
308:Strong delete
306:
304:
301:
297:
294:
292:
289:as Motor. --
288:
285:
281:
278:
274:
271:
270:
269:
266:
262:
257:
256:Strong delete
254:
252:
249:
245:
242:
240:
237:
233:
228:
225:
223:
220:
215:
211:
207:
204:
202:
199:
195:
194:Strong Delete
192:
190:
187:
183:
180:
178:
175:
171:
167:
164:
160:
157:
152:
151:
150:
147:
143:
140:
138:
135:
131:
128:
126:
122:
118:
114:
111:
109:
106:
101:
97:
93:
90:
89:
85:
81:
78:
77:
76:
75:
72:
65:
62:
60:
59:
56:
47:
46:No Consensus.
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
424:
421:
407:
395:
383:
371:
356:undue weight
355:
351:
347:
344:
340:
326:
322:
307:
295:
286:
272:
255:
243:
231:
226:
214:Bill Clinton
205:
198:JohnFlaherty
193:
181:
165:
141:
129:
112:
99:
95:
91:
79:
71:JohnFlaherty
68:
45:
43:
31:
28:
384:Strong Keep
327:accusation
360:Kalsermar
313:Kalsermar
400:CNichols
348:hearings
300:DrLeebot
186:Mwalcoff
412:Yuckfoo
273:Comment
219:GRBerry
100:promote
96:endorse
388:Jayzel
372:Delete
296:Delete
287:Delete
277:Kjkolb
236:Shenme
227:Delete
206:Delete
182:Delete
170:Kjkolb
166:Delete
146:Kjkolb
142:Delete
51:Kungfu
332:Derex
265:talk)
261:Motor
174:BillC
156:Derex
105:Derex
16:<
408:keep
396:Keep
244:Keep
130:Keep
113:Keep
92:Keep
80:Note
54:Adam
352:not
341:may
291:GWO
98:or
323:is
172:--
48:--
263:(
86:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.