This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2013 February 13. The result of the deletion review was Deletion endorsed (but history restored). For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was delete. WP:SNOWBALL, Delete, restore redirect. and protect. j⚛e decker talk 07:47, 13 February 2013 (UTC) reply
Massively POV. Rife with
soapboxing phrases like simply refer to marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman
, linked to the degradation of religious liberty
, and imperialist agenda
. Is there any conceivable good article that could be made out of this? It's within the realm of possibility. Is there anything salvageable in the page history? No. I'm half-inclined to
G11 this as completely promotional of an anti-gay point of view. (Or would that be heterophobic of me?
) Seeing as the far more objective
Homophobia#"Heterophobia" already exists, I propose we revert to Sandstein's redirect to that section, and fully protect the page until and unless someone can propose an objective version that passes
WP:42 (since really, the way I see it, the section in the
Homophobia article does the job well enough). —
PinkAmpers
&
(Je vous invite à me parler) 13:13, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
reply
This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2013 February 13. The result of the deletion review was Deletion endorsed (but history restored). For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was delete. WP:SNOWBALL, Delete, restore redirect. and protect. j⚛e decker talk 07:47, 13 February 2013 (UTC) reply
Massively POV. Rife with
soapboxing phrases like simply refer to marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman
, linked to the degradation of religious liberty
, and imperialist agenda
. Is there any conceivable good article that could be made out of this? It's within the realm of possibility. Is there anything salvageable in the page history? No. I'm half-inclined to
G11 this as completely promotional of an anti-gay point of view. (Or would that be heterophobic of me?
) Seeing as the far more objective
Homophobia#"Heterophobia" already exists, I propose we revert to Sandstein's redirect to that section, and fully protect the page until and unless someone can propose an objective version that passes
WP:42 (since really, the way I see it, the section in the
Homophobia article does the job well enough). —
PinkAmpers
&
(Je vous invite à me parler) 13:13, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
reply