Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of male detective characters


 * 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 keep. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 00:35, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

List of male detective characters

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Also nominated:

These unnecessary gender intersection articles duplicate Fictional detectives, but are gendered for totally unexplained reasons. They are also largely unreferenced or use poor sources. Should be deleted as violating the criteria for lists as well as WP:INDISCRIMINATE.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:46, 14 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:46, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:46, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:46, 14 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep "It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment." Here's a list of clues demonstrating that WP:LISTN is passed:
 * Feminism in Women's Detective Fiction
 * Queens of Crime: American and British Female Detective Novels
 * Sherlock's Sisters: The British Female Detective, 1864-1913
 * The Fictional Female Detective - American Style
 * The Penguin Book of Victorian Women in Crime – Forgotten Cops and Private Eyes from the Time of Sherlock Holmes
 * The Woman Detective: Gender & Genre
 * Gender and Representation in British ‘Golden Age’ Crime Fiction
 * Twentieth Century Crime Fiction: Gender, Sexuality and the Body
 * Gender Bending Detective Fiction
 * Men Alone: Masculinity, Individualism, and Hard-boiled Fiction
 * Hard & Soft: The Male Detective's Body in Contemporary European Crime Fiction
 * The Eating Detective: Food and Masculinity in Twentieth Century Crime Fiction
 * Detecting Men: Masculinity and the Hollywood Detective Film
 * Andrew🐉(talk) 09:23, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Nothing there suggests that a list of detectives should be separated along gender lines. Detective is not an inherently gendered occupation. Even gentleman detectives have a female equivalent of lady detectives. The sources you brought up would be a solid basis for a Gender in crime fiction article along the lines of Gender in horror films, but not related to this discussion. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 11:33, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * "You see, but you do not observe. The distinction is clear" My !vote stands. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:47, 14 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Lean delete - The subject of the lists (male/female fictional detectives) are discussed, but I see no benefit in duplicating our existing list of fictional detectives by creating two lists segregated by gender. The topic does deserve to be covered, but as a prose article on gender in detective fiction, not a list - and I note that Andrew's list of coverage is dominated by articles that focus on this concept, rather than focusing on a gendered list of fictional detectives. BilledMammal (talk) 11:36, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no separate list of fictional detectives. "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts." Andrew🐉(talk) 11:47, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Fictional detectives is the separate list of fictional detectives. (Though perhaps meriting a name change, as there seems to be some confusion about it...) ZXCVBNM (TALK) 11:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * No, the primary author of that page says emphatically and repeatedly on its talk page that "Becoming a list article wasn't my original motive of creating this article ... NO, THIS ARTICLE IS NOT A LIST!". And so that's why its title does not include the word "list". Andrew🐉(talk) 12:00, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * See WP:OWN. Just because you do not want it to be a list does not make it so. As it is, this article is clearly a list and detective fiction is the article about the genre. There need not be two separate prose articles on detective fiction and fictional detectives.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:56, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * But if the notability of the fictional detective is not disputed, why are we discussiong a deletion here rather than a merge? Daranios (talk) 14:36, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge what? The list is totally WP:OR. The female list does have a few properly sourced entries, but they are not bluelinks, so I'd be surprised if even one of them merited merging. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 15:20, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Like, merging at least all blue-linked entries? Navigation is one of the three recognized main purposes of lists on Wikipedia. The lists currently may have some entries which are not warranted, but they do fullfill that purpose. How do is Wikipedia improved by simply removing that without ever considering WP:AtD? Daranios (talk) 19:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; merge the appropriate entries into the previously discussed article, and rename it "List of Detectives" or similar. BilledMammal (talk) 23:23, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of sexuality and gender related deletion discussions. Daranios (talk) 14:36, 14 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep These lists were nominated for the gender distinction being unneccesary. This would basically apply to the Category:Fictional females and Category:Fictional males and all sub-categories and contained lists, so it is a much more general question than what we are currently discussing. I think we should not discuss that here, but ask the participants of WikiProject Gender studies for their opinion. I expect they would be the experts on how it makes sense to organize such content on Wikipedia.
 * I have a different set of arguments about these individual two lists, but find the other issue of higher importance. Daranios (talk) 14:36, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * "This would basically apply to the Category:Fictional females and Category:Fictional males and all sub-categories and contained lists" No, it wouldn't. That is very much not the case. For example, whether something is a god or goddess can indeed be defining, as their gender is tied to a lot of symbolic things. Similarly, whether someone is a prince or princess can be defining. There is no "detective" and "detectivess", it's just "detective". This is not a one size fits all situation and does not need a broad ruling. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 15:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok, you are probably right that there are instances where gender is more defining than in this case. Then again, if the distinction between male and female detectives is not defining, then why are there whole books about the female detective, as listed above? But even if it were as you say, what you suggest would not apply to everything within, but still to much, if not most of what's in Category:Fictional females and Category:Fictional males. Like, as Dream Focus said, most ...by occupation categories. The ...by medium categories. And more. Or, to look at it another way, who should decide in which instances gender is defining and in which it isn't? You? The editors? Secondary sources? Would we need to find secondary sources which say exactly "gender is a defining characteristic of the detective"? Because the existence of whole books about the female detective does not seem to convince you, or does it? So, again, I don't think this should be decided here. Daranios (talk) 19:44, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, it would apply to much if not most of what's in those categories. Which were, largely, created only recently by a few users who seemed to be totally unfamiliar with defining characteristics. Just because they exist doesn't mean they are the product of long and careful consensus. This is not a massive controversy, I think most people can agree that something like "mechanic" is not an inherently gender-based job. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 21:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * If it affects many categories, then I feel confirmed in my concerns: it should not be decided in the form of a singular deletion discussion, but in a general discussion if and when distinctions by gender should be done and when they shouldn't. I don't see what you mean by "were, largely, created only recently by a few users who seemed to be totally unfamiliar with defining characteristics". Our list here is from 2013, Category:Fictional males is from 2009, Category:Fictional female mechanics from 2019, Category:Fictional female engineers from 2016, Category:Fictional female detectives from 2014, and Category:Fictional females by occupation from 2016. Seems a broad mixture. Daranios (talk) 19:02, 16 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep WP:VAGUEWAVE at WP:INDISCRIMINATE, which does not apply to this list, is not a convincing deletion rationale. Jclemens (talk) 17:50, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep both of these, and any other the same person nominates because they don't like the gender divided list. Politicians, actors, athletes, and many others are divided by gender on Wikipedia.  No valid reason thus given to delete this.  Valid list, plenty of blue links, adds in navigation, logical grouping.  If it works as a category, then its fine for a list.   D r e a m Focus  18:09, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep The list provided by Andrew is compelling. Mukt (talk) 02:06, 16 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Related discussions, nominated by the same person for the same reason:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_September_14 Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_September_14 Articles_for_deletion/List_of_female_supervillains_(4th_nomination)  D r e a m Focus  00:39, 20 September 2021 (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.