Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masculinity for boys: a guide for peer educators


 * 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. Rjd0060 (talk) 18:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Masculinity for boys: a guide for peer educators

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Ignoring any POV issues, the simple fact seems to be that this guide has sunk without trace since publication. Despite the UNESCO imprint, it has made negligible impact on Google. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 14:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and WP:NOT, WP:SPAM and WP:INDISCRIMINATE Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 14:41, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Non notable book, no sources. Beeblbrox (talk) 15:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. - the Ghits are practically all WP mirrors, not for this article but because this guide is listed as a reference in the article Gay. JohnCD (talk) 15:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete because of what the others said Stijndon (talk) 16:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy No encyclopedic value. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  16:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The speedy deletion criteria specifically excludes books being speedied, unless it is blatant advertising or a copyright violation. Beeblbrox (talk) 18:55, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTGUIDE, WP:V and WP:RS. Cliff smith  talk  00:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per all above. Stifle (talk) 08:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per Beeblbrox. Atom (talk) 23:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments:


 * Here is a list of "worthy", independant sources that have listed the book, have praised the book or otherwise have used the book either for reference or in their work. This is what is available on the net, apart from the net, the book is used by numerous NGOs in India:

1. The Men's Bibliography: A comprehensive bibliography of writing on men, masculinities, gender, and sexualities, compiled by Michael Flood. 18th edition, 2008. Home URL: http://mensbiblio.xyonline.net/)

2. Masculinity of Boy Teenager, by Triyono Lukmantoro, Ministry of Women Empowerment, Govt of Indonesia. Quote from the article: "Which boy teenager which succeed to get out from that masculine values repressive prison? Like was revealed by UNESCO—United Nation Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (New Delhi, 2006)—on long essay titled Masculinity for Boys, boy that couldn’t adopted masculinity mean: (1) would be refused his peer group, (2) would be vile by his peer, and (3) would be considered as weaker boy."

3. [http://www.aidsportal.org/repos/YariDostiEngcoverlowres.pdf. Yaari Dosti: Young Men Redefine Masculinity, A training Manual], Published by Population council New Delhi, CORO for Literacy, Mumbai, MAMTA, New Delhi Instituto Promundo, Rio de Janerio

4. Jagori JAGORI (meaning "awaken, woman�) is a women´s training, documentation, communication and resource centre.

5. [http://www.saathii.org/gensex/calcutta/SAATHII_Cal_library.pdf. SAATHII, CALCUTTA OFFICE, REFERENCE LIBRARY CATALOGUE] SAATHI is an organisation working with Gay males.

6. [http://www.unifem.org/campaigns/csw/documents/MenAndMasculinities.pdf. UNIFEM] (Masculinity (talk) 16:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC))


 * Does Wikipedia work on mob mentality? Do you think I am UNESCO, posting this article here, selling my book? Why shouldn't I think that this book is being opposed because it challenges some very basic assumptions of the Western society, and this is just an example of Western chauvinism? I mean why would you challenge a book published by UNESCO, an international government body? Are you doubting the credibility of UNESCO?(Masculinity (talk) 16:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC))
 * Wikipedia works by forming a rough consensus on issues. Click here for more information. All articles have to be verified by independent third party sources, click here for more information on that. There is an acknowledged problem of systematic bias because this is the English language Wikipedia, although I'm not convinced that is the problem here. Click here for more information on that. Your user name and edit history do, however, suggest you may have a conflict of interest with regard to this issue. Click here for more information on that. Beeblbrox (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you seriously suggesting that wikipedia is going to decide things based on speculations about my motives? And why this need for suspicion? Come on this is a UNESCO guide. It has been verified by various independant sources. UNESCO is using this book in its programmes in various countries. That is all that is of relevance here.
 * There is an unnecessarily intense resistance from certain organised powerful forces in the West from giving validity to anything that doesn't fit in with its view of things. And this is bothersome on a site like Wikipedia. I mean would you have resisted UNESCO if it published a report on "Gays in India"? Because that fits in very well with how Westerners would like to see things. (59.180.159.62 (talk) 15:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC))


 * So is there any mechanism through which you can stop cultural hegemony by powerful western groups, that do not want anything that goes against how they would like to see this world to be given any space at all? I mean what are you going to say about all the independant websites i have quoted that have either referenced or listed this book. Is there going to be a rule neutrally applied or is it going to be mob wins (Masculinity (talk) 15:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC))
 * Well, I think you are wildly exaggerating the reasons this article is here at AfD, for starters. There is not a conspiracy here, just a question about the notability of this publication. Click here for Wikipedia's general notabilty guidelines. Three of the links you provided did not work for me, so I can't speak to what value they might have had, but theones that did work merely mentioned the existence of this publication. The threshold                     for inclusion is non-trivial coverage, and all we have here are casual mentions. Beeblbrox (talk) 15:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The link you provided for "notability" says - "The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice." So, all these people really think that "Masculinity for boys" is not a topic that is worthy of notice? There must be something about it that an organisation like UNESCO published it and has been listing it at several places and has been using it in several of its programmes. Do you think an organisation like UNIFEM or Jagori or SAATHI would list just any book. My organisation used the book in my counselling sessions in India, and I know of several reputed international as well as local organisations that do too. In fact UNESCO has also printed posters on this book/ issue that is widely distributed in India. How can it be a trivial thing for you? Masculinity itself is a hot topic in the West as well as on Wikipedia. It's an extremely important issue for boys and men all over -- their most important issue. Do you think a book on a non-western discourse on it from a reputable source such as UNESCO is going to be harmful or immaterial? This book is not for sale. I don't think there are any copies left even with UNESCO. So there is no question of anyone getting publicity or advertising for free. This information has been included here because it is being used considerably widely in intervention work in India with men, and is one of the few works on the subject in the Indian sub-continent.(Masculinity (talk) 16:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC))
 * And when you can back up those assertions with non-trivial coverage in reliable sources, there won't be any question of it's notability. That is the standard, and simply stating the reasons why you believe it to be notable does not help if you don't have the sources. Our own observations, right or wrong, cannot be the basis for content. Beeblbrox (talk) 16:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep A editor above has provided 6 references to show the notability of this UNESCO intervention in the field of sex education.  Its apparent non-notability can be explained by one simple fact: it is an Asian book.  Resources such as Google are heavily US/western biased (and, despite an official policy to avoid this, so is the Wikipedia).  Look at the various publications in Category:Sex education to give a context. --Simon Speed (talk) 23:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * comment Yes, but, as I explained above, those links may verify the existence of this publication, but there is not anything significant said about the publication. Also links 3,5,and6 are broken, so I have no idea what they might say. Beeblbrox (talk) 18:43, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Here are some more links i found on the net, plus the broken links resurrected:
 * UNESCO Bangkok This is a site of UNESCO Bangkok. It lists the book amongst significant developments of UNESCO.
 * Yaari Dosti: Young Men Redefine Masculinity A Training Manual This 110 page report from Population council New Delhi, CORO for Literacy, Mumbai, MAMTA, New Delhi Instituto Promundo, Rio de Janerio and supported by innumerous international organisations, including, Horizons, USAID, Mc Arthur Foundation, and many more, used this book as one of its references, in its training manual designed for working with young men.
 * SAATHI The book is amongst the few books the library has under the section Gender.
 * The NAZ Foundation International, The book is listed under: Gender Studies/ Masculinities.
 * International Catholic Centre for Cooperation with UNESCO, infos@ccic-unesco.org, www.ccic-unesco.org
 * Portal Duniaguru Unknown site and language. But the book is used as a reference.(Masculinity (talk) 13:37, 16 August 2008 (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.