This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jimmi Hugh (talk | contribs) at 22:53, 18 January 2009 (Indentation). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:53, 18 January 2009 by Jimmi Hugh (talk | contribs) (Indentation)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Lesbian-identified
AfDs for this article:- Lesbian-identified (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Previous discussion had a pretty much overwhelming decision to merge, though there doesn't seem to be enough material to do much with in the mergeto article. Or not enough interest. Delete SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:16, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- Merge - useful info that doesn't need to have its own article. Panyd 17:26, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- Comment - seems like a lot of the content would be more appropriate for Transgender. Not to re open the merge debate, but as I set about to do the work, that's what occurs to me. Scarykitty (talk) 17:28, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- Speedy close / merge. Last discussion was only a month ago. I see no reason to believe consensus has changed in the meantime. Give it time for consensus to settle down over whether this should be merged or not, and give editors on the articles in question time to perform the merge. JulesH (talk) 19:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Despite the previous Merge consensus. This reads more like an unreferenced essay from a lesbian apologist than it does by anyone with any understanding, or study. It's not a social academic topic, and reads as times as a pretty childish list of high school definitions of quasi-metrosexual concepts. Otherwise, get it merged already. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 22:53, 18 January 2009 (UTC)