Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay cruising in Canada


 * 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 although the two who indicated "delete and maybe merge" should know that their opinions have to be discounted. We can't delete and merge. -Docg 01:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Gay cruising in Canada

 * — (View AfD)

Was prodded, but removed on grounds of "censorship". Basically, this article is not notable and currently consists of a list of places gay men can go for sex. Not something we need on Wikipedia. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Keep minus the list of cruising spots. The top part of the article seems reasonably sourced and gay cruising is certainly a sociological phenomenon worthy of encyclopedic attention. Otto4711 21:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:NOT #2, this isn't a travel guide, take it to Wikitravel. Budgiekiller 20:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, per Budgiekiller :: mikm t  20:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - not encyclopedic, fails WP:V and WP:RS: also WP:OR. Moreschi Deletion! 21:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete this and then Merge relevant bits to Cruising for sex (which itself I'm wary of). Once you remove the list of popular spots (which is patently unencyclopedic and almost impossible to verify) you're left with a stub which can't really be improved. Cheers, Lankybugger 21:55, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletions.   -- SkierRMH 22:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT, although perhaps a bit of the article could improve Cruising for sex.-- danntm T C 05:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There's certainly a place on Wikipedia for an encyclopedic treatment of cruising as a sociological phenomenon, but a list of cruising spots doesn't really fulfill that. For comparison, the article gay bathhouse — which is certainly the model for how an article on gay cruising grounds should be structured — talks about the sociological aspects of bathhouse culture, but apart from noting a few specific bathhouses with special political or cultural significance, it does not provide an extensive list of specific individual bathhouses. And since I'm a gay man, my misgivings about this article are not coming from a homophobic or censorious place; it's genuinely coming from "does this really need to be in an encyclopedia?" The top blurb can be legitimately added to other articles and the list of cruising grounds is just unencyclopedic, so delete. Bearcat 18:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete maybe merge some of the useful material to Cruising for sex, but completely fails WP:V and even WP:OR. Arjun  19:09, 11 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.