Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homosexuality and medical science


 * 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 moved to User:John254/Homosexuality and medical science and tagged with an appropriate "non-article" notice per Verifiability and Neutral point of view. The page may be moved back to the main namespace when it is brought into compliance with these policies. Complete deletion is not justified, as there is significant interest in improving the page. John254 16:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Homosexuality and medical science

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Not a common topic name or search term. Artical is a non-neutral mess and contains no references, and has been this way since 2003. Linked to by as many redirect pages as it is other articles. FeloniousMonk 04:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This article is indeed an unsourced mess, but there's definitely a worthwhile article to be written on the topic. Maybe we should give WikiProject LGBT studies a crack at cleaning it up. In any case, I'm leaving them a message so the know this AfD is happening. I'll also make it clear I'm not soliciting anyone to vote here. --Djrobgordon 04:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * A discussion on this article has been started here, but it appears to be an amalgamation of several articles that need to be either split off or merged to other articles. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 13:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


 * This discussion has been added as a test case to the proposed guideline Notability (science). –trialsanderrors 06:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete basically an essay. Artw 06:50, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete this unsourced mess of an essay. Wryspy 07:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. MER-C 08:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Completely agree that the article is non-neutral and a mess, but it's an important topic, actually, and needs to be covered. I'm with Djrobgordon & would recommend not deleting this just yet. (We should have a probation status -- a category of articles to be looked at again in X months.) --lquilter 14:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. dposse 16:47, 28 January 2007 (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.