Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bigender (2nd nomination)


 * 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 Nonbinary gender. If there are details from this page that editors want to add to the target article, the history is available. RL0919 (talk) 23:54, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Bigender
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This topic fails WP:GNG, WP:CFORK, and WP:MEDRS.

WP:GNG is not met because there are not multiple reliable, secondary sources giving significant coverage to the topic. My own search for sources bears this out. Sources are all trivial coverage, being WP:DICDEFs at best, or are self-published sources (WP:SPS).

Reliable sources also do not treat this as a distinct topic from Non-binary gender and often simply name-drop the term (along with a quick definition) along other terms for non-binary gender. Thus, this article is a content fork (WP:CFORK) of Non-binary gender.

Gender identity and transgender (including non-binary) health are medical topics; yet no sources exist that meet WP:MEDRS that discuss this as a distinct topic. Compare the 182 PubMed results for non-binary with the 3 for bigender. Of those 3, the first two do not meet GNG, let alone MEDRS; the 3rd is setting out an untested hypothesis in a hypothesis journal and so is clearly unacceptable under MEDRS.

Here is an analysis of the sources currently in the article:
 * 1) Name-drop, survey result which doesn't distinguish from cross-dressing
 * 2) Name-drop, part of non-binary topic
 * 3) Dicdef, survey result from an outlier survey which found an overall prevalence of being transgender at least an order of magnitude higher than other surveys (see Transgender)
 * 4) Dicdef
 * 5) Dicdef, part of non-binary topic
 * 6) Dicdef, part of non-binary topic
 * 7) Dicdef, part of non-binary topic
 * 8) Dicdef, part of non-binary topic
 * 9) Name-drop
 * 10) Name-drop, primary source
 * 11) Name-drop, part of non-binary topic
 * 12) Name-drop, opinion piece
 * 13) Name-drop, part of non-binary topic
 * 14) Name-drop, part of non-binary and transgender topics, primary source
 * 15) Name-drop, opinion piece
 * 16) Name-drop
 * 17) Name-drop, part of non-binary topic

The first AfD, in 2007, offers no convincing rebuttal against deletion. There are 10 Keep votes and 1 Delete; but 5 of the Keep votes are just WP:ITEXISTS, 1 is just saying it's WP:INTERESTING, 1 is WP:ITEXISTS coupled with links to sources that merely "mention" the term, 1 is based entirely on dead links, and 2 are just "per" votes. Examining the sources put forth, I find 11 that are dead links, one that is just a dicdef, these two which are paywalled, but there is no mention in the title and beginning portion, so probably not significant coverage, one which is just more dicdefs and name-drops, and one which is just a name drop. -Crossroads- (talk) 23:00, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -Crossroads- (talk) 23:00, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. -Crossroads- (talk) 23:00, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. -Crossroads- (talk) 23:00, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -Crossroads- (talk) 23:00, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. -Crossroads- (talk) 23:00, 18 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Redirect – A poster child for a topic that is "notable" in the English sense, but not in the Wikipedia sense of Notability. I’ve looked before, too; and there just isn’t much there; maybe in a few years. No chance of expanding this beyond a stub for the time being.  Per WP:NOPAGE this should not be a standalone article. Probably should redirect to Nonbinary gender, until someone adds a section about it there. Mathglot (talk) 23:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Crossroads. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:17, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Crossroads et al. Gleeanon409 (talk) 09:55, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment No matter the outcome of this AFD, deleting the page's history is inappropriate and unbeneficial. Whether the content stays in an article of its own or is moved elsewhere is fine by me, but the fact that the nominator repeatedly blanked the page without a consensus on the grounds that it lacked reliable secondary sources, then nominated it for deletion as soon as reliable secondary sources were added, makes me seriously question whether or not this nomination was made in good faith. Cheers, Vanilla   Wizard  💙 14:19, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Crossroads and others.  NNADI GOOD LUCK  ( Talk &#124; Contribs ) 20:21, 24 December 2019 (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.