Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rape jihad (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Clarify my !vote |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
*'''Keep'''. Article is now well-written and well-sourced (as opposed to the way it was at the start of the previous AfD.[[User:Раціональне анархіст|<b style="font-family:georgia; font-size:11pt; color:#BFA3A3"> Pax</b>]] 01:51, 3 April 2015 (UTC) |
*'''Keep'''. Article is now well-written and well-sourced (as opposed to the way it was at the start of the previous AfD.[[User:Раціональне анархіст|<b style="font-family:georgia; font-size:11pt; color:#BFA3A3"> Pax</b>]] 01:51, 3 April 2015 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete''' Only five of the 35 citations actually mention the term. I would not count afternoon and frontpage as reliable. The ''National Review'' is not unbiased .See the second comment at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rape Jihad]] by Squeamish. That leaves us with Spencer. Only Spencer and a tiny minority seem to use the term. [[WP:BOMBARD]]ing sources that do not discuss the topic and [[WP:SYNTH]]esizing does not imply that the artice is "well-written" or merits inclusion. Anything that needs to be included has already been or can be included in [[Wartime sexual violence]]. Removing all off topic information will render it in the same state prior to the deletions. It fails, again, [[WP:NEO]], and I guess Pax should drop the stick and move on. --[[User:Fauzan|<span style="color:#2F4F4F">Fauzan</span>]][[User talk:Fauzan#top|<sup style="margin-left:0.5px;color:#BDB76B">✆ talk</sup>]][[Special:EmailUser/Fauzan|<sub style="margin-left:-26.5px;color:#BDB76B">✉ mail</sub>]] 02:46, 3 April 2015 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' Only five of the 35 citations actually mention the term. I would not count afternoon and frontpage as reliable. The ''National Review'' is not unbiased .See the second comment at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rape Jihad]] by Squeamish. That leaves us with Spencer. Only Spencer and a tiny minority seem to use the term. [[WP:BOMBARD]]ing sources that do not discuss the topic and [[WP:SYNTH]]esizing does not imply that the artice is "well-written" or merits inclusion. Anything that needs to be included has already been or can be included in [[Wartime sexual violence]]. Removing all off topic information will render it in the same state prior to the deletions. It fails, again, [[WP:NEO]], and I guess Pax should drop the stick and move on. --[[User:Fauzan|<span style="color:#2F4F4F">Fauzan</span>]][[User talk:Fauzan#top|<sup style="margin-left:0.5px;color:#BDB76B">✆ talk</sup>]][[Special:EmailUser/Fauzan|<sub style="margin-left:-26.5px;color:#BDB76B">✉ mail</sub>]] 02:46, 3 April 2015 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep'''. [[User:Раціональне анархіст|Раціональне анархіст]] is right. Worst regards, ''Greek Fellows". Visit ma [[User_talk:Greek_Fellows|talk page]] and ma [[Special:Contributions/Greek_Fellows|contributions]]. 07:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 07:08, 3 April 2015
Rape jihad
AfDs for this article:
- Rape jihad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Listing per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2015 March 26. This is an administrative action only; I have no opinion on the outcome. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:42, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose deletion but consider renaming to a less sectarian title such as sexual terrorism or something. Montanabw(talk) 23:51, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. Article is now well-written and well-sourced (as opposed to the way it was at the start of the previous AfD. Pax 01:51, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Only five of the 35 citations actually mention the term. I would not count afternoon and frontpage as reliable. The National Review is not unbiased .See the second comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rape Jihad by Squeamish. That leaves us with Spencer. Only Spencer and a tiny minority seem to use the term. WP:BOMBARDing sources that do not discuss the topic and WP:SYNTHesizing does not imply that the artice is "well-written" or merits inclusion. Anything that needs to be included has already been or can be included in Wartime sexual violence. Removing all off topic information will render it in the same state prior to the deletions. It fails, again, WP:NEO, and I guess Pax should drop the stick and move on. --Fauzan✆ talk✉ mail 02:46, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. Раціональне анархіст is right. Worst regards, Greek Fellows". Visit ma talk page and ma contributions. 07:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC)