| Revision as of 18:11, 1 June 2006 editFormeruser-82 (talk | contribs)15,744 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:21, 1 June 2006 edit undoNonexistant User (talk | contribs)9,925 edits →[]Next edit → | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| :::Indeed, both are forms of ] ] 18:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC) | :::Indeed, both are forms of ] ] 18:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::::Simplistic. ] 18:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC) | ::::Simplistic. ] 18:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Weak Keep''' I believe a case can be made for the term to be notable, however, I believe this article should be deleted because it's probable that it violates ]. That doesn't mean that the article shouldn't be cleaned up so that it established notability especially since I also feel that other editors may be close to violating ] in order to attack Homey and Homey's article creations. --] 18:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:21, 1 June 2006
Gender apartheid
Non-notable term and a POV-fork of sexism. It is interesting to observe that contrary to Homeontherange's view that "sexual apartheid" refers to LGBT issues, while "gender apartheid" refers to discrimination of women, the sources do not support it. For example, this Washington Post article refers to discrimination of women in Saudi Arabia as "sexual apartheid". In a nutshell, we have no reliable sources discussing the term and confirming its notability. Pecher 14:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as nom. Pecher 14:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC) (Vote by nominator, should only be counted once)
- Delete Crap article by a user (who has been blocked from editing multiple times) trying to prove a WP:POINT. -- Kicking222 15:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. Homeontherange obviously created this term so that he could justify creating a obviously pov disambiguation page.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 15:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Transwiki to Wiktionary? Xyrael 16:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - term is used widely, see external links. Mover is presenting AFD to try to prove a point since he doesn't like the phrase Israeli apartheid. Article refers to both gender apartheid and sexual apartheid as synonyms but attempts to disambiguate between two differing meanings of the phrase "sexual apartheid". I would support moving this article to Sexual apartheid (gender) (in order to disambig from the LGBT meaning) if that will satisfy Pecher as per hiw Washington Post citation.Homey 16:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per above. Jayjg 17:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete - same as sexism RenyD 17:37, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- By that argument the plight of women in Saudi Arabia today is no different from, say, that of women in the US in the 1950s. Homey 17:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed, both are forms of Sexism RenyD 18:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Simplistic. Homey 18:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed, both are forms of Sexism RenyD 18:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- By that argument the plight of women in Saudi Arabia today is no different from, say, that of women in the US in the 1950s. Homey 17:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Keep I believe a case can be made for the term to be notable, however, I believe this article should be deleted because it's probable that it violates WP:POINT. That doesn't mean that the article shouldn't be cleaned up so that it established notability especially since I also feel that other editors may be close to violating WP:POINT in order to attack Homey and Homey's article creations. --Strothra 18:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC)