Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tantric sexuality


 * 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 Keep. PeaceNT 18:11, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Tantric sexuality

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article is original research. Reads like an essay. No inline citations. Delete TheRingess (talk) 03:18, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions.   -- TheRingess (talk) 03:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Tantra, like Tantric sex does. Confusing Manifestation 03:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete The title of the article refers to a minority form of sexuality or sexual expression which I believe requires inline citation. The existing article, Neotantra is the preferred title for a synonymous subject. If Redirect is a preferred solution, redirect to Neotantra. -Vritti 04:12, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per TheRingess and Vritti. IPSOS (talk) 05:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, possibly rename to Tantra (sex). Both the Neotantra and the Tantra articles concentrate on the overall belief systems found in, for example, Hinduism.  There is a growing trend (e.g. on sex forums and dating sites) for people to talk about tantric or tantra sex.  They are meaning something distinct, seperate and identifiable from Tantra and there should be an article in this encyclopedia that explains what that is.  (I don't say the current text is good or correct but that is another matter.)  --Interesdom 06:51, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. The statement that "there is a growing trend..." is itself original research.  Who is studying this growing trend?  Where have their studies been published?  In other words, is there a reliable source for that statement? Without reliable sources, then what you seem to be describing is just another non notable neologism.TheRingess (talk) 06:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Who is studying it, indeed. --Dhartung | Talk 08:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I wasn't referring to the term itself, I was asking who is studying the "growing trend".TheRingess (talk) 13:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah. Well, Interesdom may be unaware that the "trend" has been around since the 1970s. There has been a notable shift toward the mainstream in recent years, though. I don't know if anyone has studied that.--Dhartung | Talk 21:01, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

8Keep Tantra has a much broader meaning; I think the merge and rename has merits, but the that can be discussed on the article talk pages after we decide to keep this article. There might be a purpose in separating the traditional practices from the popularized Western version. 03:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs)
 * Keep, and the current title is probably the "most common" in English per WP:NC. There are 75 books that reference the phrase, and 587 using "tantric sex", including The Complete Idiot's Guide to Tantric Sex, so this is not a non-notable or obscure concept. I have never heard of neotantra and that article in fact reads like a criticism section that belongs in tantric sexuality, i.e. some attempt to reclaim the true religious practice in a Western context. In any case, it's certainly more obscure than tantric sex, which is discussed in books, newspapers, television and radio, even if the name is inaccurate according to Hindu tradition. This article does not have inline citations, but it does have references, and asking for those references to be incorporated into the article according to 2007 Wikipedia norms is certainly welcome. But deleting the article on that basis is not warranted. --Dhartung | Talk 08:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Although I think the ideal solution would be to merge this article and neotantra into an article title "Tantric sex" dealing with the common use of "tantra" as it exists in Western cultures. Having Tantric sex redirect to tantra is just confusing to most English speakers looking for information on "sacred sex". Gimme danger 13:21, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge/rename as suggested above. I too find the redirect from Tantric sex to Tantra as being a little confusing and counterintuitive to what most people are expecting to find.  The information here and from Neotantra should indeed be merged under the title of Tantric sex, along with some cleanup to meet standards.  But it would make more sense in the context of what people are likely to be searching for.  Ark yan  &#149; (talk) 16:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Gimme danger and previous anonymous. Above all, Tibetan and Hindu tantra should be kept distinct from their counterpart in Western popular culture, although they are somehow related. The former are complex enough on their own and merging would make it even more difficult to address them appropriately. Stammer 08:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Note - a lot of people seem to be misinterpreting the suggestions to merge. No one has suggested merging this with Tantra, and in fact myself (and others) have suggested putting this all under Tantric sex and merging it with Neotantra, while severing the current redirect that Tantric sex has to Tantra.  Ark yan  &#149; (talk) 15:51, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * There are two distinct redirect proposals here, one by Confusing Manifestation, the other by Vritti. The former should imo be avoided. As for the latter, it implicitly identifies the subject matter of this article with Neotantra. Now, there is a sexual aspect both in Tantra and in Neotantra, so that it may be argued that such an identification is inaccurate. Ideally, from my point of view, the current article should be modified so as to provide informed disambiguation, pointing out the roles of tantric and neotantric sexual practices in different contexts. Actually sexual practices in Tibetan Tantra are a quite controversial subject on their own. Stammer 06:42, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Redirect as per comment by Arkyan. JJL 02:55, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete 500ghits to 7million+ for tantra means this is not notable. Baka man  20:52, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I get 27,600 for "tantric sexuality" and 360,000 for tantric sex. Further, see Dhartung's citations from actual books above. Or you could try searching Amazon, where you'd find dozens of recent books on the topic. William Pietri 11:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep with a possible merge to some other article on tantric sex. No merge to tantra, though, any more than we should merge Missionary position with Missionary. William Pietri 11:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as per the valid points made by Dhartung and Stammer above. --Kralizec! (talk) 19:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Important and valuable entry. Perhaps a merge is in order.  Bradybd 07:52, 31 May 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.