Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Female orgasm denial

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 of the debate was redirect to Orgasm denial. Done. Ifnord 18:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Female orgasm denial

• Unverified neologism, possible original research. CrypticBacon 02:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect per comments by MLA, below. --CrypticBacon 23:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete neologism, as noted above SailorfromNH 02:54, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per all above. Royboycrashfan 03:03, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Um, did y'all check Google? 12,700 hits on that exact phrase seems a bit high for an "unverified neologism". It's obviously an extremely extant term, granted that's it appears to be primarily a porn term. How common it is in the actual BDSM community I don't know. But it sure ain't an unverified neologism. Herostratus 04:02, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment It was unverified in the article. As for the Google search, well, what can I say? Not a lot of help in establishing this as a "real" term. Mostly porn ads.--CrypticBacon 04:10, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete A search of online verifiable sources as outlined above for "Splash conception" came up with no sources verifying this at all. Capitalistroadster 04:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

This is probably obvious, but I'm going to state it anyways. This vote was most likely meant to be placed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Splash conception. kotepho 21:14, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

• Comment See Orgasm denial, it does actually exist. I would suggest a redirect kotepho 05:05, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to Erotic sexual denial per kotepho. bikeable (talk) 05:25, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect per Kotepho. -- Andy Saunders 05:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect per Kotepho, though Orgasm denial needs sourcing as well. Шизомби 06:13, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect. Per Kotepho. Cnwb 07:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and Redirect to Erotic sexual denial, not to the redirect Orgasm denial. I suggest merge as the Erotic sexual denial article is purely from a male denial perspective and that isn't what this article covers. I appreciate that this article is so poorly written that it may be difficult to merge. This term is definitely not a neologism but I can't verify that from a work connection. MLA 14:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect per Kotepho. --Terence Ong 15:07, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect per Kotepho. --Oarias 04:16, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect per Kotepho. Do not merge, because this article doesn't actually say anything specific to the female case. Melchoir 05:47, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy redirect, as nom has withdrawn his delete vote. Perhaps this would be under WP:SNOW, as there are a few delete votes. But note they all predate kotepho's comment which led to a lot of votes for redirect.--Karnesky 23:09, 11 March 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.