The result was delete. No original research is a core Wikipedia content policy, and synthesis is original research. An article that cites sources that don't support the statements they are claimed to support is worse than bad -- it's deceptive. Nandesuka ( talk) 03:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC) reply
Lots of original research, a probable POV fork, undue weight, mess of a thing. The sources don't really describe any detailed problem with human trafficking in this city and it appears to only exist because of undue weight concerns in the main article. A good example of sourcing that doesn't source the article subject. Weighted Companion Cube ( are you still there?/ don't throw me in the fire) 17:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC) reply
And the article has 100 more references. / edg ☺ ☭ 18:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC) replyAgnew, who lives the life of a millionaire, moved to the Philippines seven years ago from Northern Ireland where he served as a sergeant with the RUC. And he soon opened up a string of go-go clubs in Angeles City. ... Next week Agnew will learn whether or not he will face a more serious charge of trafficking in females.
FYI, the author of this article has previously admitted to growing up in Angeles City -- HurryTaken ( talk) 22:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC) replyI have no idea why the author felt this particular city was important enough amidst the wider problems to merit its own article, but there certainly do not seem to be sufficient sources dealing with Angeles City in particular to support some of the claims.
In Angeles it is a completely different situation, the whole city was built around the human trafficking trade after the closure of the base. Organized crime shifted from Manila to Angeles and took control of the city. They control everything through restaurents, hotels, police, polititions, elections, etc. As such, the article has been kept seperate from the human trafficking in philppines article, so as not to give the reader or researcher the wrong opinion. Human trafficking in Angeles is vastly different from the rest of the Philippines, and if we merge the article it is going to give the reader and researcher a totally different and false view on the facts. Wikipedia as an encyclopedia needs to present this information in the best possible and factual way. This is why I think the merger is probably the wrong way to go here. Kind Regards Susanbryce ( talk) 17:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC) reply