Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pseudo-homosexuality

Pseudo-homosexuality was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was CONSENSUS NOT REACHED

It question what the point is, I also question the validity of the information on a psychological basis, and the general purpose of the author. Ergo I feel it does not add anything to the wikipedia. I say delete it. &mdash; bquanta 03:26, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

"This article seems to collect nothing but a number of prejudices and misinformation, each and every point of it can be (hotly) debated. Also, the references to cross-gender behaviour are based on nothing but misinformation, and that is the most polite explanation for them. There is no point whatever in this article; see the debate of it for more argumente. Deleting it would certainly improve the Wikipedia. AlexR 11:08, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I support sexual material. &mdash; [[User:33451|Mr. Grinch (Talk)]] 18:44, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Another lost VfD nomination. Keep and cleanup. Not a widely used term, but it's apparently been cited in acedemic papers since the 60's. Cool Hand Luke  05:40, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems perfectly cromulent to me. jericho4.0 07:23, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep Is there not a better name for this though? Perhaps homosexual behaviour, since the article talks of homosexual behaviour but not a homosexual identity in the people discussed.  The talk of situational homosexuality by apparently, and self described, heterosexuals may also be a better title, with the others redirecting. --ShaunMacPherson 16:33, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. This reads like original research coated with POV and wrapped in a neologism.  -- WOT 17:59, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Is it customary to delete worthy articles because they have a POV view? The phenomena of self described heterosexual individuals engaging in homosexual acts, say while in prisons - gangs - hasing rituals, exists and is a note worthy fact of human behaviour.  If it is POV then let is fix it, not delete it. --ShaunMacPherson 18:49, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * comment: Is this term in common use?   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 03:59, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, following WOT above. Maybe a bit of this can be used in the article Homosexuality. &#8212; Bill 22:15, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is already covered in situational sexual behavior.  -Seth Mahoney 22:29, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Indeed it is. Merge, redirect to this more common term. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:39, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge to situational sexual behavior, yes, but I think it needs some un-POV-ing. Inky 03:11, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge to situational sexual behavior &mdash; siro &chi;  o  10:33, Nov 1, 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.