Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Femocracy

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 delete. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 10:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Femocracy

Not encyclopedic. Appears to be merely a soapbox. A.J.A. 04:53, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

• Comment - Femocracy seems to be a neologism without a large foothold or a consistent meaning. Further, most uses do not refer to the gender-exclsuive system this article does. It was the topic of three graduate theses in Australia. I'm interested, but leaning towards delete. ×Meegs 05:10, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep but major cleanup and NPOV review. Could be an interesting/encyclopedic article. --Pboyd04 05:15, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as hoax and original research (tagged as such). "In a Femocracy only women are allowed to vote and hold political office" isn't just NPOV; it's not possibly a real proposed political system even for a feminist. --Quarl 05:43, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for several reasons, most notably a neologism, an editorial, no references, possible hoax... It would be better to scrape this page clean, and, if it is a legitimate, referenced, term, a new article should be started from scratch. B.Wind 06:06, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - This is the stupidest idea I ever heard, replacing a system where men and women vote with one where only women get to vote. I guess that means no more taxpayer-funded football stadiums would get built. Endomion 06:19, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete neologism, original research, POV, no evidence of widespread currency, and the biggest collection of tags of the day. Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 12:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. In addition to what else has been said, this article uses Wikipedia as a crystal ball. The article doesn't even purport to describe what might conceivably happen; instead, it declares what will happen (supposedly, but the smart bet is on another horse). Doctor Whom 21:24, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as (deep breath) original research, neologism, crystal ball, POV, soapboxery, and just plain total bollocks. Besides, the word for a government where women have an monopoly on political office and suffrage is "gynocracy," not "femocracy". - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:50, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, original research, speculation, and we have a perfectly good article on matriarchy that covers (and references) similar speculation. Smerdis of Tlön 04:35, 29 December 2005 (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.