Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gendering the Period Eye

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. Golbez 08:16, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Gendering the Period Eye

 * Note. This nomination should be considered in conjunction with a number that follow. They all the work of GenderStudies. -- RHaworth 12:54, 2005 Jun 9 (UTC)

Quasi-feminist, postmodernist (metadualistic postcolonial transhistorionical) mumbo-jumbo, and only 22 Google hits. Blackcats 08:04, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. POV personal essay; not an encyclopedia article.   [  +t,  +c  ] 08:39, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as above. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 11:52, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete all this period eye cruft as personal essays. Non-notable, original "research" Wikibofh 14:07, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: Original research. Another episteme from another theorist of the horizon of expectations.  Inappropriately treated. Geogre 14:50, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete along the lines of everything else this user has listed below: it falls under original research, POV, bias. jglc | t | c 17:58, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.  Please do not edit this page .