| Revision as of 12:16, 14 July 2008 editNandesuka (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,890 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:25, 14 July 2008 edit undoGeogre (talk | contribs)25,257 edits →Historical pederastic couplesNext edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| This article was nominated for deletion a couple of years ago, but the discussion surrounding it was very lightweight, on both sides of the issue. I'm hoping this nomination will get a bit more serious attention and thorough discussion. ] (]) 12:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC) | This article was nominated for deletion a couple of years ago, but the discussion surrounding it was very lightweight, on both sides of the issue. I'm hoping this nomination will get a bit more serious attention and thorough discussion. ] (]) 12:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :'''Delete''': "Pederast" is a term of law, not nature, and someone attempting to do political graverobbing is either trying to convict a number of people of a crime posthumously or trying to pile up so many corpses as to argue that the act is no crime. Either thing is bad. The "list" cannot be legitimate unless it serves a function ''as a list'' that a category wouldn't perform. Finally, this list is only valid if ''every single'' biographical article of every figure contains the information that X and Y were "pederasts." If the authors and editors of those articles eject or reject it, then this is a POV fork. For three reasons: delete. ] (]) 12:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:25, 14 July 2008
Historical pederastic couples
AfDs for this article:- Historical pederastic couples (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This article began its life as a list, but has over time become the storinghouse for any uncited claim of any person in history whom any editor wants to claim was involved in pederasty. In a number of cases (e.g. Leonardo DaVinci and Bernard Montgomery, 1st Viscount Montgomery of Alamein), material appears in this omnibus which has been roundly rejected from the main article, thus turning this list into a de-facto POV WP:FORK. Lastly, the decision for this to be a list, rather than a category (which might be defensible) smacks of original research: the desire to synthesize and publish original commentary on Misplaced Pages, which violates WP:NOR.
This article was nominated for deletion a couple of years ago, but the discussion surrounding it was very lightweight, on both sides of the issue. I'm hoping this nomination will get a bit more serious attention and thorough discussion. Nandesuka (talk) 12:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
- Delete: "Pederast" is a term of law, not nature, and someone attempting to do political graverobbing is either trying to convict a number of people of a crime posthumously or trying to pile up so many corpses as to argue that the act is no crime. Either thing is bad. The "list" cannot be legitimate unless it serves a function as a list that a category wouldn't perform. Finally, this list is only valid if every single biographical article of every figure contains the information that X and Y were "pederasts." If the authors and editors of those articles eject or reject it, then this is a POV fork. For three reasons: delete. Geogre (talk) 12:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)