Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural depictions of women in combat


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 00:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Cultural depictions of women in combat

 * — (View AfD)

This isn't the kind of topic I like to nominate; it's just too subjective to be encyclopedic. I am the editor who created the featured list Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc. I also happen to be a female war veteran.

This list's inclusion standards are too broad and poorly defined to fit Wikipedia's mission, nor have they been followed. A Few Good Men contains no combat scenes and Lara Croft is a fictional archaeologist with no military experience. The fluid and usually informal nature of women's appearances in combat situations make inclusion standards deeply problematic. Would Full Metal Jacket qualify because of the female sniper in the final scene? Would the French resistance scene put Plenty on this list? How about Platoon for its gang rape? Or The Sound of Music because Julie Andrews and the children escape from the Nazis? Most Hollywood adventure films have at least one female in the cast and often place her in danger as a plot device. That would render this list untenable if it covered cinema alone, yet it aspires to represent all depictions in all media. This reads like a few editors' POV of we think these chicks are cool. I say delete. Durova Charg e! 06:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom Bwithh 07:18, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clearly unmanageable as a single topic. --OinkOink 07:26, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as nominator. Lists which mix real and fictional characters are always a problem. Guy (Help!) 10:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. MER-C 10:52, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nominator. The scope is simply too broad.  Alternatively, narrow the scope for inclusion significantly.  Lankiveil 11:36, 1 January 2007 (UTC).
 * If I could find way to narrow the scope to something encyclopedic and objective I wouldn't have proposed this for deletion. Durova Charg e!  03:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Jyothisingh 12:22, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Just reading this 15 or so things have sprung to mind which fit this list. Widders 22:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: this could be employed to offload "cultural references" from the serious article History of women in the military. A thorough cleanup and stubbing may be better than outright delete, otherwise these "references" will appear into the main article. While this is not the ideal solution such structures serve rather well all over Wikipedia. Pavel Vozenilek 23:29, 3 January 2007 (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.