Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay men


 * 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 keep. Geschichte (talk) 07:32, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Gay men

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Formerly a redirect, this is a recently created WP:Content fork. Such duplication is bad for many reasons, one being that it makes maintaining quality much harder. This article was created by copying much of the History section of Homosexuality and by copying some material from Gay. This should be deleted and redirected to Homosexuality.

The argument for its existence appears to be that this is a necessary parallel to Lesbian. That does not follow, however. Wikipedia treats topics in the manner reliable sources do, and sometimes they treat a topic as it pertains to women, but not to men, as a separate subtopic. For example, we have Women in STEM fields and not Men in STEM fields; Women in Islam and not Men in Islam. So it is with lesbians and gay men. One can see that the content of this article does not justify its existence as an independent topic. Crossroads -talk- 05:06, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Crossroads -talk- 05:06, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Crossroads -talk- 05:06, 25 January 2021 (UTC)


 * comment I am not fool enough to get involved in this much, but I will observe that it wasn't all that long ago that the LG of LGBT stood for Lesbians as female and Gays as male. And given the complications of the argument and the great changes in theorizing over time, I'm not convinced that an AfD is the place to fight out what I am given to understand is fundamental point of dispute. I feel an RfC might be a better approach. Mangoe (talk) 06:19, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep I’m confused by the nom’s rationale comparing a page about gay men to a page about Men in Stem, esp. considering the history of violence gay men specifically have faced over history. At least in American English, gay is basically now a synonym for homosexual, so gay men clearly is an overdue and necessary parallel to lesbian. VirginiaBeach78 (talk) 13:17, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * That violence and discrimination is for being gay (i.e. their homosexuality); that doesn't prove that this is a distinct topic. Crossroads -talk- 20:59, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi dear, I would point you to one of the first lines in the article on lesbians: "Throughout history, women have not had the same freedom or independence as men to pursue homosexual relationships, but neither have they met the same harsh punishment as homosexual men in some societies." Now, if gay men were persecuted solely for their homosexuality, such distinctions in the experiences between gay men and lesbians would not exist! VirginiaBeach78 (talk) 22:23, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep re: the nominator’s point that the content of the article is largely reliant on sections from homosexuality and gay, that is only because the article was made less than a week ago. Moving forward, the full article (away from a horrible redirect) could clearly expand to recount the broader history of gay men in history, the psycho-social history of gay male identity formation, the 20th century history of gay bar raids, figures like Harvey Milk, the community split between gay men and lesbians during the period of Radical feminism, the AIDS crisis’ effects on gay men (and lesbians’ role in providing support during that period), the creation of the LGBT community, and the contemporary sociological and legal landscape of countries which explicitly ban male homosexuality. The article is short and needs a lot of work, but clearly deletion is not the answer to addressing these huge questions. Neither gay nor homosexual is a suitable synonym for gay men, and in my opinion, anything other than a full article is not sufficient. Garcia1865 (talk) 17:33, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: this is the user that spun out the article originally. I agree that the original redirect target was not ideal, but that doesn't affect the rationale above. Crossroads -talk- 20:59, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Wait, just so I understand correctly. Your suggestion is that the entirety of the cultural, social, and political history of gay men should be expressed on Wikipedia by a redirect to homosexuality? Honestly, I think your suggested redirect is EVEN WORSE than what it was before. Garcia1865 (talk) 21:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: agree with arguments above. Homosexual ≠ gay men. Gay men need their own page. Jpesch95 (talk) 21:43, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG, which is the standard we should be applying here. To give three random sources from the vast numbers available:
 * Gay Men’s Obsession with Masculinity Is Hurting Their Mental Health from Them;
 * Dozens of Gay Men Are Outed in Morocco as Photos Are Spread Online, from The New York Times;
 * What Are Gay Men for?, from the peer-reviewed journal Theology & Sexuality published by Taylor & Francis.
 * None of these sources is in the article yet, but notability is of course determined by what sources exist, and there are plenty that discuss gay men as a group apart from lesbians. (Side note: the article Homosexuality veers into discussing only gay men at times, which is odd: e.g. when it says Some synonyms for same-sex attraction or sexual activity include men who have sex with men.)  YorkshireLad  ✿  (talk) 21:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: This is a much simpler article to read and follow than Homosexuality. Harvey Milk Day is appreciated worldwide. Expunging convictions for gay crimes is being taken up in many countries. It's a new world, a world of respect. Keep. --Whiteguru (talk) 09:59, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Gay men and lesbians each make up a part of the people who are called "homosexual", I think covering the male experience in an article is a good idea.★Trekker (talk) 17:21, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. The problem seems to be duplicated content from homosexuality. But the article homosexuality is already over 170 kilobytes long, material about gay men can be moved from there to this article. J I P  &#124; Talk 21:49, 31 January 2021 (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.