Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of american women in the media since 1900


 * 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 of the debate was DELETE. The anons rather patronising defence aside, just look at the article! It's first-person research (it even says "I hope") and waxes lyrical about how underappreciated women are. This article, as the deleters make very clear, is in need of beginning over from scratch. Seqsea, note that an AfD does not "salt the earth" forever: a non-substantially indentical creation is not subject to this AfD in any way. But as the article stands, it is hopeless, it's only content being exactly as charged by the deleters. Thus, without prejudice to a proper job, delete. -Splash talk 17:23, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

History of american women in the media since 1900
As it stands, this is not an encyclopedic article, but a list of external links and hope for further contributions. Delete. DMG413 21:11, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * As it stands right now this is a PoV/soapbox article. So under WP:NOT "Wikipedia is not a soapbox" it is suitable for delete. However I think there's an interesting article waiting in here. So I'll just request a neutrality tag be added if the article is kept. Thanks. &mdash; RJH 16:02, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The article is not a POV soapbox, however, I can see how much younger people, who can't relate to the historical significance of women having been shut out of working in the news media, would think so. I can also understand why the article has limited appeal in attracting younger people to contribute to it so that it can become an article worthy of keeping. Documenting discrimination against women in this, or any other, field of endeavor is not a violation of POV. Confusing POV with documentation of discrimination isn't acceptable and thus is no valid reason to delete this article. This article is a work in progress with an aim toward attracting others to contribute to it - just as so many others on Wikipedia have done. Wikipedia needs all kinds of people, not just the young, so if you are young, why not restrain your POV and allow this article stay for a while longer.KEEP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.213.236.187 (talk • contribs)
 * Keep as an appropriate article for an encyclopedia. It needs work and cleanup, not deletion. &mdash;Seqsea (talk) 23:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, right now it's just WP:OR and links. The topic is encyclopedic, but the article needs to be totally rewritten. Sandstein 09:22, 1 April 2006 (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.