Talk:Prostitution in Mexico

Sexology and sexuality: Sex work Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Sex work task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Mexico Start‑class Low‑importance

	Mexico portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 October 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

Article should be expanded or deleted

This is pretty much the only on-topic sentence in the ENTIRE article: "In Mexico prostitution is legal for adults." The rest is about illegal activities that are only tangentially connected to prostitution. -174.151.69.91 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Article's title is misleading

Should be "Child Prostitution in Mexico", because that's all that article discusses --Coching (talk) 22:53, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. 24.160.179.33 (talk) 04:01, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Undue Weight and Incomplete tags

Per the concerns raised in the prior section, I've put an "Undue Weight" and an "Incomplete" tag on the article. The article covers child prostitution and human trafficking, as if that were the entirety of the subject. Except for a one-sentence mention, there's no mention of the fact that there's legalized prostitution in 13 of Mexico's 31 States. I would think a description of how this is regulated and actually manifests itself would merit a section of some length, not to mention a description of criminalization and/or decriminalization regimes in other states. A casual Google Books and Google Scholar topic reveals a number of books and articles on the prostitution in Mexico, covering such topics as street prostitution, brothels, and male prostitution, and that's just looking at English-language sources. This is a large topic, and while the sections in question describe some important and problematic sides of Mexico's sex industry, it is fundamentally undue weight for these topics to be the whole of the article, not to mention a bit POV. Please keep the tag on this article until sufficient expansion has taken place. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 07:31, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also note that there were UW tags added to the article in 2010, but were removed last year in an overzealous article cleanup, even though the issues with the UW problem were not addressed. Clearly, this problem with the article is long-standing. To future editors - please do not remove the tags until the problems have been addressed. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 07:42, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Poor Logic

"Currently, American men make up a significant clientele sector for sex workers in border cities, specifically Ciudad Juárez and Tijuana—in the mid-2000s, more than two-thirds of female sex workers in these two cities had had at least one male U.S. client in the prior two months."

A sex worker may have several clients a night. A sex worker having 1 US client per every 120+ is not a significant percentage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.52.176.237 (talk) 21:47, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

outdated or deleted links

All the references in the "links" section area either out dated (the newest is 8 years old...) or the link itself is broken. (I tried following all of them...)