Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sexuality Education in British Columbia


 * 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.  Hut 8.5  21:47, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Sexuality Education in British Columbia

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Propaganda piece using a WP:COATRACK article. (That the propaganda is coming from the "good" side does not change that there are guidelines: WP:OR, WP:ESSAY, WP:POV).

Now the topic might be acceptable, but it would probably better be in a parent article Sex education in Canada - and even then, that is a redlink and the section at Sex_education is almost empty. So I doubt there would be value in keeping. Tigraan Click here to contact me 16:40, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Sir Joseph (talk)  17:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Sir Joseph (talk)  17:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Sir Joseph (talk)  17:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. This is very much an essay, which isn't really about British Columbia's sex education curriculum as a thing in its own right, so much as it is about general concepts in sex education that are the same in British Columbia as they are anywhere else — BC most certainly does not have its own special BC-exclusive definitions of "homophobia" or "bullying" or "queer theory", for starters. Literally the only thing here that's uniquely BC-specific is the brief section which simply bulletpoints which particular concepts get taught at what grade level. It might theoretically be possible to write standalone articles about Canadian provinces' or US states' differing sex education curricula — but the key to making that approach viable would require an article that addressed what was distinctive about sex education in that state or province, not on just being a glossary of concepts that mean the same thing everywhere, which means that this article as written isn't even worth keeping as a foundation. Bearcat (talk) 22:09, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - This is an essay, and there is nothing to build an article with. Fieari (talk) 00:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. It could have been worse, Bearcat; it was going to be called Draft:Sexuality Education in BC's School District 23, apparently where the WP:SPA who typed this essay is employed (and who belongs to the BC Teacher's Federation that they cited and mentioned). British Columbia is scarcely mentioned and has nothing to do with this article. And prose such as "For those who consider themselves LGBTQ+, changes must occur" casts no doubt as to the motivation of the POV-pushing author. This isn't just an essay, it's an activist's blog post. The sole section about BC is an information handout sheet or activist's pamphlet. I'm torn because the article is well-cited with reliable, even scholarly sources and is not in copy violation (I checked). However, for the reasons we have all stated, this article cannot possibly be in the encyclopedia. Maybe the author can put it on their school's website. —Prhartcom ♥ 13:24, 21 June 2016 (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.