Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non statutory female on male rape


 * 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 redirect to rape  B1atv 23:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC) (non admin closure)

Non statutory female on male rape

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

All content thus far has been Original Research. Hopeless article. Etafly 18:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to rape. Lugnuts 18:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, pure OR and a dump for random fictional instances. Nothing here to merge and I don't see any utility in a redirect, either.  This concept is far too pigeonholed to ever really be an article. ɑʀкʏɑɴ 18:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I would say merge, but there is nothing to merge. There are no reliable sources on this "topic". It is akin to an article on Weaponless mugging of males by females. We might be able to find articles describing isolated incidents or parts of the description, but it is not a thing of its own in any notable way. - Mdbrownmsw 18:30, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not surprised that there's nothing to merge, or that Mdbrownmsw wants to see it deleted. Looking at the history of this article, it was fairly substantial back on September 7, with nine different citations; the social worker posting above seems to have edited it down (20+ edits) quite a bit to its present form, and may even be in an edit war with someone else named Kyle.  Mandsford 19:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The "sources" in question were not for the content they were cited for. I invite you to address the individual cites if you disagree. - Mdbrownmsw 22:09, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Version 13:34, 7 September 2007 Page created on 02:46, 8 March 2007--victor falk 21:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Besides speculation, isolated instances, and fictional occurences, there is really nothing that can be done with this article. There isn't even anything to merge. Too bad such an interesting subject lacks information. --Kyle112 22:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * merge. Since this does in fact happen, it deserves some recognition. Regarding mdbrown's remark: there are no articles regarding mugging from the perpective of the sex of the attacker and victim, and since this is irrelavent to the character of the mugging, the comparison to rape is unfounded. BillMasen 22:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment There is really nothing in the article to merge, an added section with links to real life instances in the standard rape page would be fine though. --Kyle112 23:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The article looks like it use to be OK but for some reason it was stubified. Can anyone give the background as to what happened? If there was no reason for stubification then I would have to say keep the non-stub version as it looks OK and was sourced. Pocopocopocopoco 02:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment That does look much better, however a lot of it is misleadingly or badly sourced, such as the rape case in the sperm wars section was statutory rape and not female on male non-statutory rape. And a lot of the links claim research but show none, and the entertainment section is obscenely unsourced. But Mdbrownmsw, I take your challenge, and would like you to explain how this was a bad source. --Kyle112 02:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * This one was missleading. It does not refer to men being raped by women directly, and frequently points out aspects of the attacks that make it quite clear it is men raping men that is being discussed. - Mdbrownmsw 04:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If one actually goes through the sources given on that previous version, one would find the following:
 * Discusses male rape almost exclusively in the form of males raped by other males.
 * This article is about unwanted sexual contact and does not address forcible rape.
 * This source is more geared toward male rape of males. The one mention it makes of female rape of males says that it is rare.
 * This article is about female sex offenders, and makes no mention of females raping adult males.
 * This article again is about unwanted sexual contact, not forcible rape.
 * Links back to article #4, has been given a fake title including the word "rape".
 * Talks about a paternity case involving a sperm donor.
 * News story of a woman who performed oral sex on a sleeping man.
 * Article about alleged female "rape gangs" in South Africa. From a Nigerian publisher, unsure of how trustworthy a source.
 * The fact that of 9 sources used, only 4 talk about males being forcibly raped, only 3 mention women as the aggressors, 2 are substantially about the topic and only 1 is from a well known, trustworthy source. An attempt to string together these loosely related topics and deem this a sourced article is a classical case of synthesis and is still a form of original research.  That females raping males exists is not doubted here - but aside from that fact, the article was never more than original research.  As the sources themselves admit, instances of females forcibly raping adult males is so rare (or at least unreported) as to make it a very niche crime subject and not an appropriate subject for an encyclopedia article. ɑʀкʏɑɴ 15:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete as WP:HOAX. In virtually every jurisdiction in North America, rape and statutory rape applies to both genders.  Rubbish that can not be rescued. Bearian 21:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Citing WP:HOAX is a bit harsh, don't you think? I don't think there's any bad faith in this article. It's simply a classic case of WP:OR. -Etafly 03:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Rename to "sexual abuse of men by women", of which rape is a form. The sources do confer notability for that. The present title invites to ambiguousness and controversy as to the article's topic.--victor falk 00:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Though I started this AFD, I'm not averse to redirecting to rape. That way, any semblance of useful information that we might have overlooked will still be preserved in the history and potentially used as a basis for inclusion as a section in another related article. I doubt the redirect would get many hits anyway, as the article name is pretty obscure. -Etafly 03:02, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If anything, maybe you should redirect it to Male rape research or Rape by sex. -79.179.180.125 00:33, 19 October 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.