Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gay icons (0th nomination)

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep (no consensus). Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:53, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

List of gay icons
is a list, not accurate, no explination for why some of these people are on the list. (23:11, 8 August 2005 (UTC))

Note this discussion wasn't listed when it was created, I have therefore just listed it under August 8th, not August 7th. -- Francs2000 | Talk 10:26, 8 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. Fix the list, don't delete it. Blank Verse   &empty;  02:05, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unless someone can present outside sources for the existence of "gay icons" (specifically as "gay icons") and objective criteria for inclusion, stands as original research. siafu 04:10, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Fis where necessary, but no reason for deletion. -- AlexR 09:57, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Fix it, don't delete it. -- Commking 11:57, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * This vote was actually by - could you please log in before voting?  Many thanks. -- Francs2000 | Talk [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px|  ]] 10:21, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clean up, don't delete -- Francs2000 | Talk [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px|  ]] 10:26, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. David | Talk 10:27, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - needs attention, not deletion james gibbon  10:33, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Having a "significant following among the gay community" is an extremely vague criterion, thus the very definition of gay icon is invalid. Punkmorten 11:20, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Inaccurate? Template:Sofixit. (I love that template.  I think I'm going to make use of it a lot from now on.) CanadianCaesar 12:29, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Though it's definitely odd at the moment... Dawn French and Hugh Jackman are on there, but Noel Coward and Erasure aren't? WTF? Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  13:13, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, though this needs a lot of work. Virtually every actress or singer could be listed here, so I think a very firm criteria needs to be established. IMO this list can and should be cut by up to 50%, however I lack the personal knowledge (or interest) to decide who goes; I'll leave that to someone else. 23skidoo 16:57, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete- what makes Princess Di, or Carol Burnett a gay icon as opposed to just a regular icon? The current criterion for this list is really anyone who has a following in the gay community. The number of followers is undefined, and subjective.  For instance, suppose I am gay and think that Jani Rita is a good role-model.  I could include him on the list, particularly if I have a gay friend who agrees with me.  It's inherently flawed, just as a List of heterosexual icons would be. A list of icons who are gay is encyclopedic, a list of icons liked by some gay people isn't.--Scimitar parley 17:55, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete What's the set criteria? As per Scimitar, anyone can be listed. --Dysepsion 18:20, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Scimitar. -feydey 20:34, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep clean up and set a criteria.--WolFox 20:41, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, if there is not a list of Heterosexual or bisexual icons, why should there be a list of Gay icons, I would suggest a list of Icons who are gay, but not a list of Gay icons. (Mac Domhnaill 23:15, 8 August 2005 (UTC))
 * Keep. Deleting the category is OK only if the list is kept. CDThieme 23:57, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Inherently point of view category designed to make a point. Sure to attract endless misleading entries. Osomec 00:10, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I usually vote to keep random lists as this, but what it takes to be a gay icon is a vague, and in most cases, unverifiable standard.  &rarr;ub&#949;r n&#949;mo &rarr;  lóquï 00:54, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete User:Philwelch marked everyone on this list as Category:Gay icons as a test for Merge some redundant lists to categories.  Using the category tag on each person's page lets the expert for that person decide whether or not they are a gay icon.  -- Norvy (talk) 02:57, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The X-Men? Bruce Willis? Princess Di? Carol Burnett? As far as I can tell, any person or character with any following that happens to include some homosexuals can be included, according to these vague criteria. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 05:17, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep, but keep none the less. Youngamerican 13:43, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm gonna have to go with delete here. Entirely subjective lists like this always deteriorate into crap as users add anyone who comes into their mind to it. Bruce Willis? Is every "hunky" guy as well as every flaming queen to be included, as well as nearly everybody in between? If the list is fixed I may be persuaded to change my vote, but I'm not convinced it can be. -R. fiend 15:41, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Criteria for inclusion on the list too vague; don't really see how it could be fixed. Sliggy 16:21, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. It is perplexing to me why Category:Gay icons was kept in a recent CfD.  Hall Monitor 23:20, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * See also Category_talk:Gay_icons, a question which was never answered. Hall Monitor 23:23, 9 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete out of date cliché.     ( ! | ? | * ) 20:10, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete hopelessly POV. Since "Gay icons are sometimes also popular with heterosexual fans", how is that different from someone who is simply very popular? ManoaChild 02:38, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. If the quality of the list is poor, fix it don't delete it. — OwenBlacker 20:33, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Its not the quality, but the impossibility oif choosing a standard.  &rarr;ub&#949;r n&#949;mo &rarr;  lóquï 20:54, August 12, 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep --Romeo Bravo =/\= 21:49, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Very Weak Keep were it not for the fact that I know there is such a thing as a gay icon and there probably could be a good article about them I'd say delete. I agree with all of those who have said that there is basically no justification for any of these people to be considered gay icons and thus in my view this article serves very little purpose.  It seems very arbitrary and doesn't meet the standards that seem to normally be applied to other Wikipedia articles in terms of detail and in terms of original research.  I don't really want to see it trashed, but if it were come up for a vote for deletion again in a few months and nothing has changed I would very likely vote the other way.  Each person on the list should, at the very least, have enough of a following as a gay icon to warrant a section in the original article otherwise it would appear to me to be very arbitrary.  Some of them seem to be very improbable to me...  Mr. Clean?? is this really a substantial portion of this imaginary cleaning man in an unusually clean outfit's cultural context?  Gabe 00:12, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, this list is far too expansive. You've got almost half the celebrities in Euro-American Pop Culture on the list!70.243.39.62 04:03, 16 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.