Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Way of a Man with a Maid


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:00, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

The Way of a Man with a Maid

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No references proving it is notable. I find the term used for other things quite often, but have not found any reliable sources mentioning this. Its just a rape fantasy book written quite some time ago.  D r e a m Focus  03:27, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Edit: There are in fact notable references for this horrid book. The article should be less than just one big plot summary.  Since its not possible to read more than a brief passage from the books mentioning it, I'm not sure what sort of article could be made.  D r e a m Focus  15:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Doesn't anyone else ever notice when an AFD isn't formatted properly?! Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I followed the instructions on the AFD page. I figured it'd just cycle through automatically at one point, and fix itself.  Thanks for the assistance though.   D r e a m Focus  04:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You're supposed to use afd2 on this page. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 12:53, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete Willing to withdraw if there is any indication of notability, right now: none. Simonm223 (talk) 18:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete Per nom and simonm223. i could not find any indication that this is a notable piece of victorian erotica. lots of reprints only means its in public domain, and an easy reprint to make some cash on. funny, the only reference provided is from the bible...Mercurywoodrose (talk) 23:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep found this in Google Books. Agree, there's a number of other books on sex that include this name or phrase, but one of those two mentions appears to clearly reference this book.  Also, I'm weighing slightly the fact that the text is in Wikisource. Jclemens (talk) 07:01, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It list it twice, the second time referring to something from the 1960's. The book mentioning it doesn't seem to be notable at all.   D r e a m Focus  08:38, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * August 8th, 2009 is when someone added it to Wikisource. Anything out of copyright can be added, there no real requirements at all.  Please do not let that influence your opinions.   D r e a m Focus  08:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Has coverage in these sources:. Also is referred to in what is widely regarded as one of the greatest novels ever written, and in these sources:, although I can't see the text of the last two. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "The way of a man with a maid" is line 30 of Kipling's poem, "The Long Trail" where it is included in a paraphrase of Solomon's question(Proverbs 30:18-19)... Please read the links more carefully. I'll go through them now, but not every use of that term has anything to do with the book, and those who claim it is important seem to be only those who are trying to sell it on their websites.   D r e a m Focus  15:43, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * All but number 6 are about the book. Yes, it has notable coverage, despite being a horrid things, glorifying rape, saying women will eagerly enjoy it so its already to abuse them.  The article should be more than a plot summary of course.   D r e a m Focus  15:55, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You please read number 6 more carefully. If you read on (by clicking on the page number), you will see that it continues to say, but Bloom has in mind an anonymous late-nineteenth-century pornographic novel in which the "heroine", prudish Alice, refuses the "hero", Jack, only to be trapped and debauched by him. I remember that mentions in Ulysses have been accepted as contributory factors in keeping articles on Dublin streets, so similar reasoning can apply to this book. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Whoops! My mistake.  I click on it and read that yes, it does mention this book.   D r e a m Focus  16:15, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, Wikipedia is not censored, the fact the user finds it distasteful is irrelevant. Initially hiding behind notability concerns she now concedes are not correct - I am left struggling to understand how "it would be hard to write a good article" is a reason for deletion. Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 18:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article badly needs rewriting, but there seems to be enough sourcing. WP:ZOMG!!!!!VICTORIANPR0N!!! is not in itself a valid reason to delete.  pablo hablo. 20:47, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. On the criteria of notability, it beats many others on site. That it isn't tasteful, doesn't match existing criteria. -- billinghurst (talk) 07:53, 17 October 2009 (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.