Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roman 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 --SPUI (T - C) 18:41, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Roman Sexuality

Original research, no sources, probably unverifiable. Solely the work of an editor whose sole contribution it is. - CheNuevara 18:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom -- RoySmith (talk) 18:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom JianLi 18:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This is the standard academic view on the topic that I remember from my classics courses. It needs sources, but these shouldn't be hard to find. JChap (talk • contribs) 19:09, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. Standard academic topic for discussion in any History department. I know i had a course in NJIT, at least. Project2501a 19:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment CLA 331-001 GENDER and SEXUALITY in GREECE and ROME. 300-level course taught at the univerity of Kentuky. As this link shows the existance of such an academic topic, and therefore is't not orinal research, I move to dismiss this AfD. Project2501a 19:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Extra link at Oxford U : Sexuality and Gender in Greece and Rome
• Comment Solely the work of an editor whose sole contribution it is. is not good reason to AfD an article. It could very well be a newbie user. Project2501a 19:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I checked and the history showed a lot of folks who edited it, so I do not believe it was a BITE nomination. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 19:43, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I added a few sources to the main text, and I believe it can be worked on from the sources. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 19:43, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment an article rename has been suggested for this article. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 19:49, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and rename to Sexuality in Ancient Rome. The article has greatly improved since the initial nomination; now it features references. —this is messedrocker (talk) 20:03, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep it is a worthy subject with many university courses and printed books covering it. I have added links to some. I also support the renaming. —WAvegetarian•(talk) 20:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Since the article has been sourced, I'm willing to withdraw my nomination/vote for delete. But I would like to comment,
  1. The "solely the work" comment was to support the original research characterisation, not to bite the newcomers
  2. Original research can exist in an established field, and that doesn't make it any more acceptable. Just because a field exists doesn't mean that what's written about it in Wikipedia is established / not OR. However, now that this article is sourced, I'm satisfied that it isn't. - CheNuevara 22:14, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and rename to Sexuality in Ancient Rome or something along those lines. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 22:33, 22 July 2006 (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.