Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pro-feminism

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - kept, but needs cleanup - SimonP 23:41, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

Pro-feminism

was listed as a copyvio but the author owns the copyright. The article is an essay and not suitable for an encyclopedia. --nixie 10:16, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Essay, FAQ, longwinded platform for a URL link, veers pretty close to nonsense in places. Excerpt: Homophobia leads men to limit their loving and close friends not useful. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:23, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
• undecided, clearly needs cleanup to remove pov, etc, and most of the waffle should go (but with the appropriat outlink). I suppose to be a feminist one has to be female, but one can agree with certain tenets of feminism whilst being male. This I think is usually expressed as liberalism, but if anyone can come up with a more specific widely-used term. The piece's author Mr Flood seems to be the only one who refers to this as "pro-feminism" on the WWW. Dunc|☺ 14:41, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete: Utterly useless neologism and original research. Therefore it violates the deletion policy. On the content, all I can say is that it is rambling and a cherry picking of things that bother the author. There is no such thing as "feminism," as "feminism" refers to not one, but dozens of developments of thought, so there is no such thing as being pro-feminism, for one is always pro- one type/strand of feminism and never all of them. Geogre 15:29, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Redundant neologism. Peter ^Isotalo 20:39, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Pointless POV essay. Nestea 22:12, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. It's just an essay with little factual information, and it would be too difficult to salvage what little info there is to make the article a NPOV. MegaSlicer 23:53, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete; It's indeed no more than an essay, not wikified in any way. While its not impossible that an article with this name could be decent, this is not. Deletion is better than stubbing it down. -- Ec5618 12:18, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep Not sure about this one, but I er on the side of caution. POV can be tidied up and a quick google for the turn returns 3k hits[1], 290 if you search google groups[2] so I'm not sure it does meet the criteria of a neologism. Axon 11:11, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup. Concur with Axon on this. Enough Google hits suggest it doesnt fit into the category of a neologism. Megan1967 03:10, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Strong keep. The current version has obviously been completely turned around the personal essay discussed earlier. I've heard and seen the term very often (almost invariably in the form and context "pro-feminist men"), and it is subtly but significantly distinct from feminism. Samaritan 12:14, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, and continue cleanup efforts. ElBenevolente 18:21, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep some major rewriting of this article combined with Google hits indicates this article should be kept. JamesBurns 10:21, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep rewrite. Leanne 10:27, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep but needs heavy editing -- AlexR 10:19, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Isn't a "pro-feminist" just a "feminist" by another (longer, less precise and ultimately redundant) name (cf: "reverse racism")? Exploding Boy 22:45, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.