Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genital Autonomy America


 * 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 merge to Intact America. Liz Read! Talk! 07:02, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Genital Autonomy America

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Does not pass WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. A previous redirect attempt was overturned with the claim "passes WP:NOTABILITY" but the article is almost entirely sourced to primary sources. The sole non-primary source is just about circumcision generally and doesn't mention this advocacy group at all. Aside from a few passing references in books and a couple op-eds by people affiliated with the group, I cannot find sustained coverage. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)Talk to Me! 17:55, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Sexuality and gender. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)Talk to Me! 17:55, 11 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Catherine M. Roach (2022) is a secondary, academic reference which explicitly mentions Genital Autonomy America as a notable organization that promotes body positivity and genital integrity, and belongs to the sex-positive movement: GenoV84 (talk) 18:16, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 * You're giving a lot of commentary there that the book doesn't have. The actual mention in the book is the single sentence "See also the organization Genital Autonomy America", which does just about nothing for notability. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)Talk to Me! 18:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:39, 11 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Commentary based on what the source itself states. Here's the full quote (page 122):

"There are implications here for issues related to penis circumcision such as female genital cutting or mutilation (see also chapter 21) and surgeries on the genitals of babies born with intersex conditions of differences in sex development. Advocates against these procedures use umbrella terms such as genital autonomy and genital integrity. These procedures raise complex issues of consent, medical justification, parenting responsibilities, religious and cultural context, and human rights. For one such discussion of intersex issues, see the United Nations Awareness campaign Free and Equal. See also the organization Genital Autonomy America." GenoV84 (talk) 20:47, 11 October 2022 (UTC)


 * That paragraph, which apparently applies to "advocates" in general and not just GAA, doesn't say that GAA is an organization that promotes body positivity and genital integrity, and belongs to the sex-positive movement. The only thing it says about GAA is (to paraphrase) "If you're interested in learning more about this, there's a website in the endnote that might have more information." ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)Talk to Me! 20:57, 11 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Yet the author explicitly mentioned it in her essay as a source of further informations about the aforementioned topics. I suppose that it would be better to merge it with the main article Circumcision controversies. GenoV84 (talk) 01:30, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * This wouldn't pass WP:SIGCOV. The source article makes a plainly trivial mention of Genital Autonomy America in a book about sex positivity. Original research is required to extract content about the organization, thus violating significant coverage. Cadenrock1 (talk) Cadenrock1 (talk) 14:04, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge with Intact America for the simple reason that Genital Autonomy America actually merged with Intact America on July 1, 2021. I already carried out this merger a few days ago, I'm not sure why it has now been reverted back from a redirect to Intact America to a standalone article. There are some legitimate concerns about primary sources, so I removed a lot of irrelevant material from such sources. It may also be that GAA is not independently notable, but it doesn't have to be if it's part of the Intact America article, which is. Problem solved. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:16, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Merge with Intact America.4meter4 (talk) 02:12, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge with Intact America per Nederlandse Leeuw. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:53, 19 October 2022 (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.