- 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 delete. Sandstein 09:47, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
I need feminism because
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- I need feminism because ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG. Source 5 does not mention the movement at all; source 3 is a reprint of a Facebook post; sources 1 and 2 are not independent of the topic, seeing as though they are from the institution that the movement originated in. That leaves only source 4, which is mentioned with reverence within the article (The Boston Globe, the region's largest newspaper, even covered the campaign in December 2016). Coverage by major sources should be standard for topics covered on Wikipedia, not an added bonus. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 21:53, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parker's Red Pen ( talk • contribs) 23:17, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 21:53, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 21:53, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
- Merge/Redirect? The article states that this was started at Boston University in 2016, but according to Who Needs Feminism, the "I need feminism because" social-media campaign started at Duke in 2012. It seems possible that a campaign or campaigns using the "I need feminism because" language are notable or that "I need feminism because" is a notable slogan, but I don't think we need to have separate articles on various manifestations of it. – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 22:43, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
- I understand what you're saying but there's no proven connection between the two movements, it seemed like 2016 US presidential election was the lone catalyst for this one. I don't think there's anything of substance to merge to the original; this one never made it internationally like the Duke one did, and I could easily sell my own branded sporting equipment. While a couple sources have been added since I initially nominated, the only SIGCOV is still from local sources.
Willsome429 (
say hey or
see my edits!)
00:15, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that there's a connection between the movements (unless someone indicates somewhere that the MA campaign was inspired by an earlier one, I'd believe they came up with it independently, or at least thought they did) so much as floating the idea that the phrase, or the idea of a social media campaign about why people need feminism, is maybe more notable than a specific campaign that uses it. –
Roscelese (
talk ⋅
contribs)
00:17, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry for the misinterpretation. I do agree that a general movement page is a lot better than two specific ones. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 00:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that there's a connection between the movements (unless someone indicates somewhere that the MA campaign was inspired by an earlier one, I'd believe they came up with it independently, or at least thought they did) so much as floating the idea that the phrase, or the idea of a social media campaign about why people need feminism, is maybe more notable than a specific campaign that uses it. –
Roscelese (
talk ⋅
contribs)
00:17, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- I understand what you're saying but there's no proven connection between the two movements, it seemed like 2016 US presidential election was the lone catalyst for this one. I don't think there's anything of substance to merge to the original; this one never made it internationally like the Duke one did, and I could easily sell my own branded sporting equipment. While a couple sources have been added since I initially nominated, the only SIGCOV is still from local sources.
Willsome429 (
say hey or
see my edits!)
00:15, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Based on these suggestions I have moved all of this content under the "Spread" section of the
Who Needs Feminism page. Thanks for all of the feedback — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Steve42382 (
talk •
contribs)
22:52, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Per policy, Articles for Deletion discussions should run a minimum of one week before any proposed outcomes are acted upon. Additionally, there are issues with the current content (specifically tone issues) that should not be merged, if in fact the discussion results in a merge. Thank you for the willingness to do the merge, but we have to wait a week first. Don't forget to sign your posts on talk and discussion pages with four tildes (~~~~) at the end!
Willsome429 (
say hey or
see my edits!)
23:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- There is absolutely no need to wait for an AfD to close to edit an article not subject to the AfD, or indeed to edit the article that is subject to the AfD. -- Andreas Philopater ( talk) 14:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Per policy, Articles for Deletion discussions should run a minimum of one week before any proposed outcomes are acted upon. Additionally, there are issues with the current content (specifically tone issues) that should not be merged, if in fact the discussion results in a merge. Thank you for the willingness to do the merge, but we have to wait a week first. Don't forget to sign your posts on talk and discussion pages with four tildes (~~~~) at the end!
Willsome429 (
say hey or
see my edits!)
23:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- The user was trying to implement the “merge” outcome before consensus was made. Not trying to limit editing on pages but trying to wait for consensus on outcomes. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 14:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Fails WP:GNG. Specifically the topic has not received significant coverage. There were a handful of short human interest stories in the local Boston press in 2016, then nothing. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 05:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. Does not pass notability standards, and is promotional. Natureium ( talk) 17:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Not notable and failed WP:GNG but way be appropriate for a passing mention in another more relevant, not orphan articles Ed6767 ( talk) 13:59, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
- Somewhat related question: Before I pull the AfD trigger, does anyone have an opinion as to whether the
Who Needs Feminism page should be listed for deletion as well? That page has a bit better sourcing than this one (The Christian Science Monitor) but appears to have many of the same issues this one has; a handful of short human interest stories between 2012 and 2014, then nothing. Note: the citation to The Guardian in that article appears to be about Altrincham Grammar School for Girls, not Duke University. If the Who Needs Feminism page and I need feminism because pages are both deleted, is there a logical article where we can mention these movements, on the assumption that they don't meet the requirements for standalone articles but do meet the requirements for a paragraph or two in an existing article? --
Guy Macon (
talk)
16:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
- I wouldn't consider the other article to have significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Natureium ( talk) 21:59, 29 May 2020 (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.
- 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 delete. Sandstein 09:47, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
I need feminism because
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- I need feminism because ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG. Source 5 does not mention the movement at all; source 3 is a reprint of a Facebook post; sources 1 and 2 are not independent of the topic, seeing as though they are from the institution that the movement originated in. That leaves only source 4, which is mentioned with reverence within the article (The Boston Globe, the region's largest newspaper, even covered the campaign in December 2016). Coverage by major sources should be standard for topics covered on Wikipedia, not an added bonus. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 21:53, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parker's Red Pen ( talk • contribs) 23:17, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 21:53, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 21:53, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
- Merge/Redirect? The article states that this was started at Boston University in 2016, but according to Who Needs Feminism, the "I need feminism because" social-media campaign started at Duke in 2012. It seems possible that a campaign or campaigns using the "I need feminism because" language are notable or that "I need feminism because" is a notable slogan, but I don't think we need to have separate articles on various manifestations of it. – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 22:43, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
- I understand what you're saying but there's no proven connection between the two movements, it seemed like 2016 US presidential election was the lone catalyst for this one. I don't think there's anything of substance to merge to the original; this one never made it internationally like the Duke one did, and I could easily sell my own branded sporting equipment. While a couple sources have been added since I initially nominated, the only SIGCOV is still from local sources.
Willsome429 (
say hey or
see my edits!)
00:15, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that there's a connection between the movements (unless someone indicates somewhere that the MA campaign was inspired by an earlier one, I'd believe they came up with it independently, or at least thought they did) so much as floating the idea that the phrase, or the idea of a social media campaign about why people need feminism, is maybe more notable than a specific campaign that uses it. –
Roscelese (
talk ⋅
contribs)
00:17, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry for the misinterpretation. I do agree that a general movement page is a lot better than two specific ones. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 00:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that there's a connection between the movements (unless someone indicates somewhere that the MA campaign was inspired by an earlier one, I'd believe they came up with it independently, or at least thought they did) so much as floating the idea that the phrase, or the idea of a social media campaign about why people need feminism, is maybe more notable than a specific campaign that uses it. –
Roscelese (
talk ⋅
contribs)
00:17, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- I understand what you're saying but there's no proven connection between the two movements, it seemed like 2016 US presidential election was the lone catalyst for this one. I don't think there's anything of substance to merge to the original; this one never made it internationally like the Duke one did, and I could easily sell my own branded sporting equipment. While a couple sources have been added since I initially nominated, the only SIGCOV is still from local sources.
Willsome429 (
say hey or
see my edits!)
00:15, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Based on these suggestions I have moved all of this content under the "Spread" section of the
Who Needs Feminism page. Thanks for all of the feedback — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Steve42382 (
talk •
contribs)
22:52, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Per policy, Articles for Deletion discussions should run a minimum of one week before any proposed outcomes are acted upon. Additionally, there are issues with the current content (specifically tone issues) that should not be merged, if in fact the discussion results in a merge. Thank you for the willingness to do the merge, but we have to wait a week first. Don't forget to sign your posts on talk and discussion pages with four tildes (~~~~) at the end!
Willsome429 (
say hey or
see my edits!)
23:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- There is absolutely no need to wait for an AfD to close to edit an article not subject to the AfD, or indeed to edit the article that is subject to the AfD. -- Andreas Philopater ( talk) 14:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Per policy, Articles for Deletion discussions should run a minimum of one week before any proposed outcomes are acted upon. Additionally, there are issues with the current content (specifically tone issues) that should not be merged, if in fact the discussion results in a merge. Thank you for the willingness to do the merge, but we have to wait a week first. Don't forget to sign your posts on talk and discussion pages with four tildes (~~~~) at the end!
Willsome429 (
say hey or
see my edits!)
23:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- The user was trying to implement the “merge” outcome before consensus was made. Not trying to limit editing on pages but trying to wait for consensus on outcomes. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 14:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Fails WP:GNG. Specifically the topic has not received significant coverage. There were a handful of short human interest stories in the local Boston press in 2016, then nothing. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 05:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. Does not pass notability standards, and is promotional. Natureium ( talk) 17:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Not notable and failed WP:GNG but way be appropriate for a passing mention in another more relevant, not orphan articles Ed6767 ( talk) 13:59, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
- Somewhat related question: Before I pull the AfD trigger, does anyone have an opinion as to whether the
Who Needs Feminism page should be listed for deletion as well? That page has a bit better sourcing than this one (The Christian Science Monitor) but appears to have many of the same issues this one has; a handful of short human interest stories between 2012 and 2014, then nothing. Note: the citation to The Guardian in that article appears to be about Altrincham Grammar School for Girls, not Duke University. If the Who Needs Feminism page and I need feminism because pages are both deleted, is there a logical article where we can mention these movements, on the assumption that they don't meet the requirements for standalone articles but do meet the requirements for a paragraph or two in an existing article? --
Guy Macon (
talk)
16:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
- I wouldn't consider the other article to have significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Natureium ( talk) 21:59, 29 May 2020 (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.