688:, and not promoting the Philippines' point of view of the Spratly Islands dispute. However, the article does have a lot of sources to back it up, and as the article is too long to be merged back into the main article of the Spratly Islands dispute, it is an acceptable POV fork. What should be done, instead of outright deletion, is to carefully reword the article in such a way that it is presented in a neutral tone, and reactions from other Spratlys-related articles can be included. Also, there should probably be more sources from non-Filipino sources, preferably Chinese ones, especially for the responses. And this opinion is coming from a Filipino editor!
423:
actually include opposing opinions and rebuttals where available. Though that's probably limited due to language differences in the involved countries, i.e. a
Filipino editor will usually not be able to understand Chinese sources; though the opposite is less true as much of the Philippine media is in
484:
The argument of "acceptable" content fork cannot stand particularly
Spratly Islands is a hotly disputed territory involving multiple nations and I don't think a content pork for such controversial subject can legitimately exclude the opposing views and remain neutral. Any attempt to evade neutrality
354:
I referred to the statement of the article's creator, "Non-Filipino viewpoints regarding
Philippine occupation of several islands are not included in this article." And the article was constructed in such a way that non-Filipino views were not included.
164:
555:– Outright deletion is too hasty. This article has 57 cited sources (as of this post), many of which are reliable. Rather than deleting the entire work, perhaps editors can consider improving it, per
424:
English. Scope of article is defined from the start, so the reason for the absence of parallel
Chinese, Vietnamese, Malaysian, etc. government policies or activities are quite obvious enough. See
158:
437:
as long as the title clearly indicates what its subject is, the point-of-view subject is presented neutrally, and each article cross-references articles on other appropriate points of view.
419:
Acceptable content fork. Exclusive POV is not an attempt to evade NPOV, but is due to length of the article. Cursory reading shows article is well-sourced enough, worded neutrally, and
92:
87:
96:
79:
396:
119:
380:. Questions regarding the article's neutrality can always be worked on through subsequent editing. That's a better alternative than deleting the article altogether.
124:
296:
256:
276:
83:
179:
146:
607:
577:
559:. Of course, performing research and copy editing requires much more time and energy compared to simply deleting the entry in entirety.
75:
67:
692:
662:
654:
There are some essay-like points in the article that could be original research and synthesis. Copy editing can correct these matters.
649:
623:
589:
567:
545:
502:
473:
408:
389:
364:
345:
308:
288:
268:
248:
226:
204:
61:
140:
136:
17:
186:
541:
711:
425:
377:
152:
40:
239:
the
Philippine involvement in the disputed Spratly Islands, therefore the best course of action is deletion.
521:
462:
689:
537:
707:
657:
562:
36:
435:
Different articles can be legitimately created on subjects which themselves represent points of view,
335:
633:
632:
clearly nationalistically promoting and glorifying one country as shown in the above example. (See
445:
It can not be merged into the mother article. But that, in itself, is not a reason for deletion.--
172:
556:
529:
447:
619:
580:), and it is unacceptable under the neutrality policy. The best course of action is deletion.
525:
404:
385:
57:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
706:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
328:
214:
195:
The article explicitly excludes non-Filipino points of view therefore it should be deleted.
612:
the NPOV policy is used sometimes as an excuse to delete texts that are perceived as biased
602:
576:
The article is actually promoting the
Philippine occupation of the disputed islands (e.g,
517:
332:
645:
585:
498:
490:
360:
304:
284:
264:
244:
222:
200:
637:
533:
324:
320:
615:
400:
381:
53:
113:
319:
based on the stated rationale for deletion; I don't see explicit exclusion. See
641:
628:
I have wanted to copyedit the article but it's a fundamentally unacceptable
581:
494:
356:
300:
280:
260:
240:
218:
196:
524:, the amount of referenced content is so large that it would be subject to
532:. If there is this much referenced content, the subject clearly meets
684:
written in a neutral point of view. The article is supposed to be
516:, Although the content could be merged into the articles such as
700:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
636:). It should be deleted according to the deleton policy -
426:
Knowledge:Content forking#Articles whose subject is a POV
217:
requiring "the relative prominence of opposing views".
109:
105:
101:
171:
378:
Knowledge:Content_forking#Acceptable_types_of_forking
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
714:). No further edits should be made to this page.
397:list of Philippines-related deletion discussions
614:. The article can just be rewritten over time.
297:list of Military-related deletion discussions
257:list of Politics-related deletion discussions
185:
8:
528:, and require that the content be split per
395:Note: This debate has been included in the
295:Note: This debate has been included in the
277:list of History-related deletion discussions
275:Note: This debate has been included in the
255:Note: This debate has been included in the
394:
294:
274:
254:
235:- The overall undertone of the article is
485:by using "acceptable" content fork is
7:
680:. Yes, I agree that the article is
76:Philippines and the Spratly Islands
68:Philippines and the Spratly Islands
24:
578:the "Construction policy" section
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
428:. Quoted below, emphasis mine.
1:
237:nationalistically glorifying
213:- The basis of my reason is
731:
693:11:47, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
663:14:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
650:08:39, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
624:07:28, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
590:00:28, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
568:13:24, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
309:02:39, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
289:02:10, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
233:Supplementary statement 2.
211:Supplementary statement 1.
62:11:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
546:23:29, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
503:19:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
474:17:25, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
409:16:07, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
390:16:02, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
365:15:51, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
346:12:43, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
269:19:44, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
249:19:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
227:15:51, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
205:11:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
703:Please do not modify it.
600:is not a substitute for
32:Please do not modify it.
522:Spratly Islands dispute
48:The result was
690:Narutolovehinata5
661:
566:
538:RightCowLeftCoast
487:gaming the system
472:
457:
411:
344:
311:
291:
271:
722:
705:
660:
658:Northamerica1000
655:
565:
563:Northamerica1000
560:
553:Keep and improve
470:
467:
461:
460:
455:
452:
446:
338:
190:
189:
175:
127:
117:
99:
34:
730:
729:
725:
724:
723:
721:
720:
719:
718:
712:deletion review
701:
656:
561:
518:Spratly Islands
468:
463:
458:
453:
448:
132:
123:
90:
74:
71:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
728:
726:
717:
716:
696:
695:
674:
673:
672:
671:
670:
669:
668:
667:
666:
665:
606:. Quoting the
571:
570:
549:
548:
510:
509:
508:
507:
506:
505:
477:
476:
442:
441:
440:
439:
430:
429:
413:
412:
392:
370:
369:
368:
367:
349:
348:
313:
312:
292:
272:
229:
207:
193:
192:
129:
70:
65:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
727:
715:
713:
709:
704:
698:
697:
694:
691:
687:
683:
679:
676:
675:
664:
659:
653:
652:
651:
647:
643:
639:
635:
631:
627:
626:
625:
621:
617:
613:
609:
605:
604:
599:
596:
593:
592:
591:
587:
583:
579:
575:
574:
573:
572:
569:
564:
558:
554:
551:
550:
547:
543:
539:
535:
531:
527:
523:
519:
515:
512:
511:
504:
500:
496:
492:
488:
483:
482:
481:
480:
479:
478:
475:
471:
466:
456:
451:
444:
443:
438:
434:
433:
432:
431:
427:
422:
418:
415:
414:
410:
406:
402:
398:
393:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
372:
371:
366:
362:
358:
353:
352:
351:
350:
347:
342:
337:
334:
330:
326:
322:
318:
315:
314:
310:
306:
302:
298:
293:
290:
286:
282:
278:
273:
270:
266:
262:
258:
253:
252:
251:
250:
246:
242:
238:
234:
230:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
208:
206:
202:
198:
188:
184:
181:
178:
174:
170:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
138:
135:
134:Find sources:
130:
126:
121:
115:
111:
107:
103:
98:
94:
89:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
702:
699:
685:
681:
677:
634:WP:PROMOTION
629:
611:
601:
597:
594:
552:
513:
486:
464:
449:
436:
420:
416:
373:
341:Boracay Bill
340:
316:
236:
232:
231:
210:
209:
194:
182:
176:
168:
161:
155:
149:
143:
133:
49:
47:
31:
28:
557:WP:PRESERVE
530:WP:SIZERULE
159:free images
686:discussing
526:WP:TOOLONG
376:It passes
333:Wtmitchell
708:talk page
339:(earlier
329:WP:SODOIT
215:WP:YESPOV
37:talk page
710:or in a
630:POV fork
608:NPOV FAQ
598:Deletion
120:View log
39:or in a
616:Xeltran
603:Cleanup
595:Comment
491:WP:GAME
454:BSIDIAN
401:Xeltran
382:Xeltran
165:WP refs
153:scholar
93:protect
88:history
54:Jenks24
638:WP:DEL
534:WP:GNG
417:Oppose
374:Oppose
336:(talk)
327:, and
325:WP:OWN
321:WP:DUE
317:Oppose
137:Google
97:delete
180:JSTOR
141:books
125:Stats
114:views
106:watch
102:links
16:<
678:Keep
646:talk
642:STSC
620:talk
586:talk
582:STSC
542:talk
514:Keep
499:talk
495:STSC
421:does
405:talk
386:talk
361:talk
357:STSC
305:talk
301:STSC
285:talk
281:STSC
265:talk
261:STSC
245:talk
241:STSC
223:talk
219:STSC
201:talk
197:STSC
173:FENS
147:news
110:logs
84:talk
80:edit
58:talk
50:keep
682:not
536:.--
520:or
469:OUL
187:TWL
122:•
118:– (
648:)
640:.
622:)
610:,
588:)
544:)
501:)
493:.
489:-
407:)
399:.
388:)
363:)
331:.
323:,
307:)
299:.
287:)
279:.
267:)
259:.
247:)
225:)
203:)
167:)
112:|
108:|
104:|
100:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
60:)
52:.
644:(
618:(
584:(
540:(
497:(
465:S
459:†
450:O
403:(
384:(
359:(
343:)
303:(
283:(
263:(
243:(
221:(
199:(
191:)
183:·
177:·
169:·
162:·
156:·
150:·
144:·
139:(
131:(
128:)
116:)
78:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.