Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sexuality and gender

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting
(Redirected from Wikipedia:DSSG)
Shortcuts
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Sexuality and gender. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Sexuality and gender|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Sexuality and gender. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch

In addition to AfDs, this page also tracks Categories for discussion, Templates for deletion, Miscellany for deletion, and Deletion review, but these discussions are not automatically expanded here. You will have to follow the links from here to the discussion pages. Instructions for adding these discussions to this page are provided in the comments when you press "edit".

For important information about categorization:

See also: Wikipedia:Categorization/Gender, race and sexuality


Articles for deletion

edit

List of people with non-binary gender identities

edit
List of people with non-binary gender identities (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While I'm sure this list seemed like a good idea when it was started in 2015, it is no longer practical to keep it updated. According to Wikidata, there are about 1000 non-binary people with Wikipedia articles. This list only includes about 200 of them (including some that probably don't belong, like Prince). The number of notable non-binary people is growing at a rapid rate and I think this information is better handled via Wikidata and categories (the same as we handle other genders). By only listing a small fraction, we are giving the false impression that there are a much smaller number of notable non-binary people than there really are. If you disagree, please elaborate on how you think this list can be realistically kept up-to-date into the future. Nosferattus (talk) 16:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support: Seems reasonable to handle the same as other gender identities. Is it possible to redirect to Category:Non-binary people (even though it's out of the article namespace)? The downside would be that there's no central list: categories organize things as trees, and it's impossible to view an actual list of all the people. But that may be inevitable. If wikidata gives a list view, maybe it's possible to link to wikidata somehow? Mrfoogles (talk) 16:22, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Need a second opinion though Mrfoogles (talk) 16:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I wanted to make a comment first before voting. I am going to throw this out there; we have list articles like Lists of women, Lists of men, List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people, Lists of LGBT people, List of transgender people. Honestly I don't understand the arguement behind this at all.CycoMa1 (talk) 17:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like can any of you please provide a link to a policy page to back up your arguments?CycoMa1 (talk) 17:17, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like are any of the arguments backed up by Wikipedia:DEL-REASON?CycoMa1 (talk) 17:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway I think I said everything I needed to say right now. Just going to wait for others to comment.CycoMa1 (talk) 18:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CycoMa1: How about we change it to Lists of non-binary people, similar to Lists of women and Lists of men? This would include lists like List of non-binary writers, and other more manageable sub-lists. Nosferattus (talk) 23:19, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would be in support of that. But this discussion is more about whether or not the article should be deleted.CycoMa1 (talk) 23:35, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually let me reword myself. I won't be against it.CycoMa1 (talk) 23:48, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As far as the policy reasons for deleting, it would be WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:DEL-REASON #14: "Any other content not suitable for an encyclopedia". It is not appropriate for an encyclopedia to have constantly-changing unmanagably-long lists such as this one. There is precedent for deleting lists that are too long and unmanagable: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of Salticidae species (2nd nomination), although that case also involved redundancy. Nosferattus (talk) 00:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is no reason to delete the article per the things I said earlier.CycoMa1 (talk) 18:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We maintain a list of the 1,025 Pokémon, so why not the roughly 900 pages in Category:Non-binary people? That's a large but not intractable number of entries, and not even close to the largest stand-alone list on Wikipedia (I've personally touched List of women authors which includes over 8000 entries). Updating the article to include all current English Wikipedia biography subjects in that cat (excluding the dozen which are fictional, like Toad) is a perfectly feasible task for a motivated volunteer with a spreadsheet. There is no deadline. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 19:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it's helpful at all, I got an LLM to spit out a SPARQL query, which retrieves the relevant data for whatever set of article subjects are correctly tagged as being non-binary humans in Wikidata (875, at time of writing). –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 20:09, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RoxySaunders: That's a good start, although there are also 46 gender identities in Wikidata that are subclasses of non-binary. Plus we need references for all of them (or at least the living ones, which is most of them). Nosferattus (talk) 23:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Newroz clashes (2023)

edit
Newroz clashes (2023) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS, local event only covered by Turkish media sources. Ecrusized (talk) 01:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eve Vorley

edit
Eve Vorley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP1E. Football club directors are not inherently notable and by coverage this is a pure BLP1E as the appointment of a porn/glamour performer caused some noise at the time. Beyond that, nothing. Not by her real name or alias Spartaz Humbug! 12:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Shellwood (talk) 13:00, 4 July 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Poppy Morgan

edit
Poppy Morgan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

How has this survived the raised expectations around porn performers. The sourcing is well below GNG for a BLP. Spartaz Humbug! 12:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Shellwood (talk) 13:00, 4 July 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Aimee Knight

edit
AfDs for this article:
Aimee Knight (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Hi, I’ve nominated this page for deletion as I’m not sure whether they are relevant enough to warrant an entire wikipedia page, politicians who’ve stood for election and lost with less than 2% of the vote don’t generally get Wikipedia pages, especially when they’ve done nothing of much note after the fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxisediting (talk • contribs) 15:40, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can an admin delete this comment and block this person for using such a language! FuzzyMagma (talk) 11:48, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The only "problem" with the redaction is that it proved my point that there are massive WP:NPF concerns with this article, which is about a non-public figure. SportingFlyer T·C 13:39, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While there is a numerical consensus to Keep, they are weak Keeps with no reference to policy or sources. Also most participants have, what I consider, low edit counts so I'm not sure how familiar they are with the norms of AFD discussions. I'd just like to relist and hopefully hear how this subject meets Wikipedia's standards of notability and, specifically, what reliable independent sources provide SIGCOV.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are MULTIPLE reliable sources about the subject cited on the page, notability is obviously established, keep. Pyraminxsolver (talk) 04:49, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: although not a notable as a politician, there is a substantial coverage from reliable sources that Checks all the boxes of WP:GNG comment there is coverage but the page is mostly about David Challenor, Knight's father, and gives undue weight to Challenor. If the article is kept, can someone fix this problem please and create a separate article for David Challenor (currently a redirect) because he actually deserves one with all of the coverage. I am really concerned about why this article was first created and I can’t assume good faith looking to keep votes above. FuzzyMagma (talk) 11:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Very difficult case. She's borderline notable, but mostly for other people's wrong-doing and the way it affected her. I don't think it's realistic to have an article on this subject that adheres to the spirit of WP:BLP while also respecting WP:WEIGHT. That is, when the notability claim isn't extremely sound to begin with, and the source of that notability would demand a largely negative article chiefly related to the misdeeds of other people, we arrive at an exceptional scenario. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:27, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:HEY: I just rewrote the article to be less of a train wreck. There's still some work to do but it no longer repeats her fathers crimes in every section and no longer misrepresents the sources as more critical than they are. I'm very sympathetic to arguments presented by @SportingFlyer, @Rhododendrites, @Say ocean again, and @SnowFire - but think that she is clearly notable to the extent we can't simply delete the article. We have sustained coverage over years detailing how she was a rising star for the greens and held prominent positions, engaged in advocacy, and her career was very publicly derailed following her father's conviction. I believe we should focus on making sure everything there is due and the BLP issues are handled sensitively rather than deleting it. I pinged y'all to see if my edits fixing the ostentatious BLP issues persuade you the article is salvagable, no worries if not. Best, Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 01:57, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not sure this is an improvement. By removing that the protest was related to her father's crimes, you've made the Reddit protest make no sense in your version as coming from seemingly out of nowhere. If she's going to have an article at all, it's going to need to include when her father was relevant to her biography in all of the parts it is relevant (which is unfortunately quite a lot of it), which is why I'd rather just delete entirely. Additionally, there are still aspects that are only questionably relevant - like why are we listing exactly all of her psychological conditions? Obviously autism is a bit of a special case as many people consider that a core part of their identity, but I'm not so sure Knight considers it that, and then that leaves why the others anyway (which are implicitly equated with the autism spectrum)? Your version has also added in more commentary from Knight (e.g. including the IMO fairly meaningless "she condemns the tweets" - of course she does, or including a long quote from her on resigning from the Green Party rather than simply saying it was due to transphobia). If we set aside her father's actions... what distinguishes Knight from any other activist? Not much, as best I can tell. This is not something article editing can really fix. This is an odd version of Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability, where she's borderline notable but that notability is tied up in a non-notable person's negative coverage. SnowFire (talk) 02:17, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep: she clearly passes WP:GNG. There are multiple in-depth and independent reports about her. Bondegezou (talk) 06:19, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Categories, Templates, Redirects for deletion

edit

none at this time

Miscellany for deletion

edit

Proposed deletions

edit

Deletion review

edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Sexuality_and_gender&oldid=1233371581"