Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Violence against men and women


 * 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.  Sandstein  19:03, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Violence against men and women

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

While this is linked from a popular userbox, it really fails as a dab. It seems a pretty unlikely search term, so I propose deleting this page and modifying the userbox to read This user rejects any violence against men and women. --BDD (talk) 19:28, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. --BDD (talk) 19:30, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. --BDD (talk) 19:30, 28 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Isn't violence against men and women just... violence? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:19, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe they are tacitly promoting violence against the transgendered, genderqueer and intersexed. Or against animals? How about, "This user rejects any violence against living organisms, with the possible exception of food". Owen&times;  &#9742;  14:37, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails DAB policies by only having 2 entries (WP:D says a hatnote should be used). And what about violence against transsexuals, transgender people, intersex people, hermaphrodites, etc.? While I don't want to start a full-scale trans*-rights protest, I don't think we should preserve this just to satisfy a userbox? Not a useful page. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:31, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment: For seven years, until last month, the userbox was a feminist one, refering only to violence against women. Then, out of an abundance of political correctness, rightly or wrongly, someone amended the userbox to include victims of violence of either gender, thereby making the statement meaningless. I've never seen userspace as an appropriate place to make political statements, but appreciate the fact that working with volunteer editors, one must allow some leeway in self-expression, at least on the editor's userpage. My guess is that most users who exhibit the box on their page haven't even noticed what it recently turned into, and if they did, would rather see the userbox reverted to its original purpose. But then again, I cannot, in good faith, justify the previous, sexist wording. Owen&times; &#9742;  15:16, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, that explains things somewhat. That userbox edit appears disruptive, but I don't see evidence of disagreement with it. Personally, I think if you say you're against violence against women, that says nothing about your position on violence against men. If I sport a userbox claiming I love hot dogs, it tells you nothing about my opinion on hamburgers, and it would be wrong to assume I dislike them. --BDD (talk) 16:00, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete as a DAB that disambiguates two loosely-connected topics.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 01:07, 31 August 2013 (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.