Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Social Context of Men's Meat Consumption

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. Rx StrangeLove 05:41, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

The Social Context of Men's Meat Consumption
Was marked for speedy deletion, but does not quite qualify because, as the message left on its talk page says, the first paragraph looks like the beginning of unsourced, original research. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:34, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete looks like it would be original research... but they forgot to put the research part in. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 01:39, September 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete looks like it's going to turn into a last-nights-sociology-essay or something worse. -Splash 02:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless it can be made into a properly sourced article. Friday (talk) 02:53, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This article is clearly not finished though. If it can be fixed into a serious artilce(which I guess it could be), then it can stay. Voice of All  (talk)  04:32, September 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete now, before it turns into an essay's worth of original research. Or delete afterwords as original research, either way is fine. Aquillion 06:40, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Contributes nothing. Obviously the beginning of a thought never finished. Could be informative if expanded beyond a mere article template.
 * Delete per Andrew Paul 00:53, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. If and when someone can produce a real, non-original-research article, they can re-introduce it. What is there now is not worth keeping, even as a stub. Owen&times; &#9742;  23:14, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Owen&times; and others. There could be an article on some subject along these lines. For example, consider Jeremy Rifkin's book, Beyond Beef: The Rise and Fall of the Cattle Culture, ISBN 0452269520. Not that Rifkin is necessarily... well... can you say "point of view?" Beef has had symbolic importance and has been associated with virility, as well as wealth and high social status, in many cultures, including ours. But this isn't a good start on such an article. To begin with, the title reads like an essay title. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:24, 14 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.