Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gender stereotypes in Television Commercials


 * 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. WP:SNOW. This is not a wikipedia article and it's unlikely that it could be turned into one. It's possible that an NPOV article could be written on the subject but that would be an entirely different article. Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:43, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Gender stereotypes in Television Commercials

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is an essay structured and written to present an argument, not a WP:NPOV encyclopedia article. Previously prodded, but creator removed the prod notice without providing a rationale or improving the article to any significant degree. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 20:09, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 22:24, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 22:24, 5 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Essay gets 2/10. An article may be possible with this title and scope but this ain't it. Delete. pablo 23:02, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Very poorly written, but it can be improved to match wikipedia standards, although it would still remain irrelevant. --Ultrablastic123 (talk) 23:26, 5 December 2010 (UTC) - User was just blocked for being a sock puppet. Mathewignash (talk) 10:59, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete, obvious violation of WP:NOTESSAY. There needs to be a "A11 - Blatantly an essay" WP:CSD criterion. - The Bushranger Return fire Flank speed 02:19, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I put the prod 2 on it, and haven't changed my mind. "The purpose of this work is to study gender stereotypes in advertising" says ESSAY in capitals. If it were an overview of other researches into the subject (all referenced neatly), there might be a case. This appears to be a direct study of a limited range of confectionery. (I was puzzled at first by the inclusion of Alpen Gold, as in the UK Alpen is a Weetabix muesli type cereal product. Alpen Gold is a Kraft chocolate product and a high seller in Russia, whence it would seem this article originates.) Peridon (talk) 11:18, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete poorly written essay page. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 13:37, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd give it a B+ as an essay, and then delete it. Bearian (talk) 23:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete, OR/essay. Roscelese (talk) 05:57, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. One of the best-written and researched pieces I have read on the internets.  My only concern is that this article appears to be a word-for-word duplicate of an article I read last month in "Foreign Affairs," or was it the "Atlantic Monthly"? Tonyeason (talk) 13:05, 7 December 2010 (UTC)  This user is a sockpuppet of User:Wiki brah
 * The above user has only edited one other article and that one is rather unexpected for a new account. Peridon (talk) 19:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Essay. Not well-written. Tonyeason needs more variety in their reading habits if they think this is good. Drmies (talk) 13:32, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, do we have a WP:SNOWBALL yet? Wuh  Wuz  Dat  18:21, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Nothing but original research. OhNo itsJamie Talk 02:28, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, slam-dunk unencyclopedic essay. Daniel Case (talk) 03:29, 11 December 2010 (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.