Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Anna Frodesiak (talk | contribs) at 14:21, 15 December 2012 (i think the debate is closed). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Cross-dressing. There's consensus that this variant of cross-dressing doesn't need a separate article. The two "keep" opinions don't address the issue of content forking. Whether there's anything to merge is not clear from the discussion, but can be done editorially from the history.  Sandstein  10:31, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

MTF cross-dressing

MTF cross-dressing (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)

Unnecessary fork of cross-dressing. All reliably sourced content has already been merged into the cross-dressing article. Pburka (talk) 03:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

• Merge. No need to delete. Insomesia (talk) 18:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

No problem with a redirect page. According the the nominator sourced content is already merged. Steve Dufour (talk) 22:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

• Delete both articles There are only (unless I'm missing something) 2 types of cross-dressing. If we split it this way the only thing left in the main article would be cross-dressing in general. One article seems like the best way to go. Steve Dufour (talk) 22:24, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
• Keep or at the very least, Merge, agree with Insomesia (talk · contribs), zero need to delete this page. — Cirt (talk) 00:55, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

• Keep In East Asia, there is a word refer MTF cross-dressing, (女裝,女装 :same word) --Jeonggwa (talk) 23:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
• Question why Drag queen, Methods of passing as female, Transwoman remain separate article? --Jeonggwa (talk) 02:49, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
• There are only (unless I'm missing something) 2 types of drag. but Drag queen and Drag king did not merged. --Jeonggwa (talk) 02:50, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz 01:25, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

• Redirect to cross-dressing. It's reasonable to have articles on distinct cultural phenomena like drag queens and drag kings (and other cross-dressing subcultures or behaviours), but MTF cross-dressing can be done for many reasons, and therefore it's better dealt with in an article on cross-dressing in general. Since there are only 2 types of cross-dressing, there's no argument that a split is needed for length or comprehensibility. Additionally, for many people cross-dressing is synonymous with MTF cross-dressing (i.e. they don't think of women crossdressing) so covering the topic under cross-dressing is what would be expected. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:15, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

KEEP --게이큐읭 (talk) 08:38, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

• Redirect to cross-dressing. Doesn't independently justify an article in and of itself whilst relevant content has been moved over already. -Rushyo 13:12, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
• Note: Please see relevant discussion at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/FTM cross-dressing. — Cirt (talk) 19:18, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.