Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Socio-economic structure of the FARC-EP

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete. — Scientizzle 16:53, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Socio-economic structure of the FARC-EP

Neutrality, lack of reliable sources and proper citations Zer0~Gravity ^{(Roger - Out)} 02:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was defectively listed at MfD by the confused nominator. The debate should be considered to have been begun when I correctly placed it in the proper log: 15:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC). Xoloz 15:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Reeks of original research -Drdisque (talk) 08:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Provisional keep until an argument for deletion is made that isn't entirely WP:PROBLEM. Please take note of the potential of an article on this topic, not the current state of this one. Skomorokh ^incite 09:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Bearing WP:PROBLEM in mind, this article is too troubled even to make the proper case that such an article should exist. If there is an article here, this WP:OR collage isn't it. Xoloz (talk) 16:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Isn't this an argument to stub and rewrite rather than delete? Hundreds of reliably souerced works, from news reports to features and books have been written about FARC; it seems implausible to propose that none of these contain non-trivial coverage of the organization's socio-economic structure. Skomorokh ^incite 16:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In this case, with an article this incoherent, I cannot know where to begin with a stub, and I cannot be sure that a separate article, rather than inclusion in FARC, is the proper course. This AfD will not preclude someone from later writing a reasonable article on the same topic. You, or anyone, are more than welcome to try stubbing this now, and if that stub makes sense to me as a separate article, I'll change my mind accordingly -- but I am not knowledgeable enough to know where to begin, having not read many of the hundreds of sources there must be on the FARC.

Of course, a redirect is a possibility, too; but, there's nothing to merge here, and I think the title is a very unlikely search term, given the likelihood that searchers interested in the topic will begin at FARC. Xoloz (talk) 08:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletions. —FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 19:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

comment who ever wrote it had intentions of publishing a non neutral article. It's rather promotional. I tried to work on the article and it was a bit overwhelming since I don't have access to the books listed as references and the article doesn't have inside citations to verify the information. The article is solely about what the FARC preaches for their "utopia" but not of what they actually do.. is not even clear if they are truly communists or serve their own interests... I mean these are considered a terrorist organization for some reason.. the FARC bases its financial income solely on criminal activities.. specially drug trafficking, treatment of children there was no mention of this in the article, violations to women and of course, human rights. Take a look here Ideology of Hezbollah this article has criticism sections. The article needs an expert on the subject otherwiese I'm in favor of deleting it. --Zer0~Gravity ^{(Roger - Out)} 22:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is an essay. Any information necessary should be spun out to FARC and then it should be deleted. Buckshot06 (talk) 23:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
'Delete a political essay with no attempt at balance and with non-current sources. DGG (talk) 11:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.