Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pederasty in the Middle East and Central Asia


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 07:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Pederasty in the Middle East and Central Asia

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This article, largely written by ArbCom banned User:Haiduc, may seem encyclopedic on a first pass, but in effect is little more than a content fork. Although the article has been edited since then to remove some of the most blatant POV pushing, it still has questionable value. Many of its sections attempt to summarize other articles, with main or see also tags. It's unclear to me why this intermediate article is needed when those summaries can be added to the main article on Pederasty, and detailed treatment is done sub-articles. This article also engages in direct interpretation a lot of historical primary sources. The lead also seems to attempt to draw its own conclusions with no clear references. Pcap ping  10:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Tending delete for the reasons outlined above. I can't see why this is separate from the parent article. Alot of it is written like an essay and seems to be drawing alot of extraneous material to give validity. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * delete I would agree that this is a POV pushing article. Any valid material bleiongs elswhere.Slatersteven (talk) 14:11, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I edit a lot of Central Asia-related articles, and saw this nominated on the list of Central Asia-related deletions. I only looked over the Central Asia section, and while it certainly needs work, there is good content there. It covers historical references to the practice and current debate about the practice in the region. If this article is ultimately deleted, I'd like to move the Central Asia section into its own article. The practice was/is common enough in the region, and enough well-documented sources exist to warrant its creation. In fact, even if kept, it might be worthwhile to split the two anyway. Otebig (talk) 15:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * By all means, if there's salvageable contents not included in other articles, it should be salvaged. Pederasty in the Renaissance was an article that had some salvageable contents for instance, and I merged it to LGBT history. Pcap ping  15:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  -- Pcap  ping  14:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Central Asia-related deletion discussions.  -- Pcap  ping  14:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions.  -- Pcap  ping  14:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * delete - per nom. Unencyclopedic content-fork, and a coatrack for someone's POV-pushing - A l is o n  ❤ 18:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * delete its more of an essay than an encyclopaedia article. Also per Alison above. Viridae Talk 01:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Long POV-fork essay overflowing with original research, speculation and non-verifiable commentary.  Also, since it is known that Haiduc routinely misrepresented the content of sources, even the info in this article that has footnotes can't be assumed to be reliably sourced.  If the article is not deleted, all the sources would have to be vetted.  --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 04:12, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This article is just another POV. Amphitryoniades (talk) 07:36, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nominator and as per my other deletes in similar afds of late. Thanks, SqueakBox talk contribs 14:52, 12 February 2010 (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.