Talk:Friend zone

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 9/5/2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

I never realized the "friend zone" was gender specific. A straight woman can fall into the "friend zone" too, for example becoming "one of the lads" or a sister figure, when she actually wants to be a romantic interest. I speak from experience :)

1 it's gender-specific because...
2 Watch out for other signs!
3 Value in finding a relationship
4 Problems
5 Needs a complete rewrite
6 All original research
7 crap crap crap

[edit] it's gender-specific because...

people who give this advice usually believe that women aren't interesting enough to be friends with unless there's a good probability of sex.

This article is rather uncritical.

[edit] Watch out for other signs!

One of the indicators that one is in the friend zone is "other various signs?" Does anyone else find that really entertaining but not especially informative? Yeah, it probably is just me. But I'm changing it anyway. Bad ideas 06:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Value in finding a relationship

Its value for helping a man find a secure, loving relationship is uncertain.

The value lies in saving the man from wasted time and unwanted hurt.

[edit] Problems

This article is falling into the original research tarpit. Last year it was a handy, short reference to the fact that there is a thing called the "friend zone" and where it's used, now it's starting to be an advice column and attracting all sorts of crufty, pointless insertions. It sounds made-up because it is made-up. If this article is to be saved from the hell that is music genre definition articles, something must be done. --Dhartung | Talk 23:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

This article needs more than cleanup, it needs heavy cleanup, or a complete rewrite. Klosterdev 18:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Needs a complete rewrite

The article does not read like an encyclopedia entry, is sexist, and much of it is not sourced. The topic itself is completely valid, and is common in human relations. While it doesn't deserve deletion, it does need a complete rewrite, preferably by a psychologist or someone who studies human relations. Klosterdev 18:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. I dislike this article, as it feels like something one can read in a gender specific magazine :-/ Not enough references, and it uses assumptions rather than facts (or proven facts - not facts based on a few people's past history wtih the opposite gender). Kitushi 22:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] All original research

Is there anything but original research in this article? You can't use use male-help websites as references for facts abut men and women, when the websites themselves don't cite any sources. --Apoc2400 09:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)