Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of asexuals

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete (blk-cmp error). – ABCD 01:16, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of asexuals

This "article" is at best speculation. Aside from a small list of names, the only text in the article is The following people are or were—probably or definitely—asexual. This is appallingly imprecise and unencyclopaedic. Several users have removed names from the list for lack of evidence or erroneous supposition of their asexuality. Delete with extreme prejudice. Exploding Boy 18:11, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. I was briefly involved with this article last November, I think it was, and restored it on the understanding that it might be made encyclopedic, which didn't happen. This list is a complete shot in the dark and currently absent sourcing. Mackensen (talk) 18:18, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, unverifiable, no potential to become encyclopedic. "Never married, no evidence of sexuality in public record" does not equal "asexual". Lots of us, er, I mean lots of people have sexuality that doesn't make the newspapers and gets misinterpreted as "no alignment" or "unapproved alignment". Barno 19:47, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Wrong on many levels, especially the potentially libellous one... Fire Star 20:16, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I agree with all the above. Mgm|^(talk) 21:06, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Agree with all of the above. This is almost certainly unverifiable and/or potentially lawsuit-inducing. Not only that, but I always understood "asexual" to mean "without determinable biological sex", like worker ants. Isaac Newton may have died a virgin, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a male, or else we could add plenty of Popes to this list as well. Meelar (talk) 21:09, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
• Jaysus, what a worthless excuse for an article. No definition or parameters, just a flat assertion without any proof or argument that the people listed are "asexual". Delete, with prejudice. --Calton | Talk 01:10, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete unless someone provides sources. Maybe delete it even then. Dave the Red (talk) 03:47, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. The listed people may have been celibate or have had no sex life to speak of for various reasons but they were not biologically asexual. The list would have to include either self-professed asexuals or people born without sexual characteristics whatsoever. As far as I know, there are no known examples of the latter - Skysmith 07:26, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for far too many reasons to list here. Edward Gorey? 23skidoo 19:38, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Agree with everything Barno said. Jonathunder 04:59, 2005 Apr 8 (UTC)
• Delete postmortem speculation. And come on, "Ho Chimin"? I cannot begin.. --Asriel86 23:22, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
• keep and expand, no just kidding. Delete as vandalism --204.38.191.99 13:06, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • That was me, sorry... WoW 13:07, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.