Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Headsplitting


 * 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. Salvio Let's talk about it! 15:32, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Headsplitting

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article creator contested PROD. This is an article about a type of penis modification surgery that I PRODed for lack of coverage in reliable sources that satisfy WP:GNG. All the sources I found were either blogs or other non-reliable sources. The book that is claimed as a reliable source is a series of interviews which confirms that the term does exist among those who have penis modifications and is used frequently in that community, but does not establish notability beyond that. There is nothing here that couldn't be covered in the Genital modification and mutilation article if sourced properly. TonyBallioni (talk) 04:12, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Update nomination The following page is also included in this nomination per 's comment below. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:10, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:33, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:33, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:33, 2 January 2017 (UTC)


 * delete I looked in pubmed and google books and found no reliable sources for this. Jytdog (talk) 08:24, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note - I am adding Genital bisection to this nomination. Same issues as Headsplitting. Jytdog (talk) 08:27, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I've listed it above using the bundled nomination template. I also agree that it has the same issues and should be deleted. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:10, 2 January 2017 (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.