Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slut Night

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The result was keep, nomination withdrawn and all delete !votes reversed. Nice job on the rewrite. ɑʀкʏɑɴ 14:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Slut Night

Slut Night (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

* Delete The "article" on Slut Night is really nothing more than an advertisement. Tovojolo 09:49, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

This AFD was malformatted, it is fixed now. Blueboy96

*Delete Not enough independent sources, via a check on Yahoo or Google. Blueboy96 10:25, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Change to strong keep per Benjiboi's yeoman's job. Blueboy96 17:51, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

*Delete The article "does not assert the importance or significance of its subject". Not notable and unencyclopedic (a "social gathering"). --Malcolmxl5 10:29, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

• Change to strong keep. An excellent piece of work by Benjiboi and I'm pleased to change my response from delete to strong keep. --Malcolmxl5 19:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 10:53, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Note that this is a second nomination. The first discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slut night. Aleta 16:18, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete This article appears to be an ad for one particular organization's parties, while ignoring other uses of the term (such as swinger parties found in a Google search of the the phrase). Aleta 16:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC),
  • Keep - Benjiboi has done a good job taking a crappy ad and turning it into a real, informative, sourced article - probably the best thing that can happen with an AfD. Aleta 22:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

*Delete unless this can be Keep as rewrite has shown this to be a general term for butch-femme nights rather than a term used by a single organisation. Bigdaddy1981 03:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. This is definitely not notable as a general term and is basically unsourced. TAnthony 14:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
  (Revised opinion below)

::I didn't think it was. I've certainly never heard it used by any lesbian friends of mine. Bigdaddy1981 20:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Comment: 13:43, 18 July 2007 - Article rewritten.
• Keep The minority within a minority group of butches and femmes are purposefully elusive to mainstream society as a general rule and their traditions and celebrations would be hard to find just as if any other group held an "insider's" event but welcomed new members and the general (supportive) public. I've added to the article and I hope it clears up notability issues. Also the "sponsoring" organization (and authority) is simply the mailist server which hosts the various mailists these communities use. In my experience these mailists are routinely dropped from Yahoo groups et al as hey deal with adult sexuality so the email lists are now home at Butch-Femme.com which does hosts the annual "Butch-Femme.com Bash." Also, Butch-Femme.com is free and commercial-free which I addressed in the article. Benjiboi 13:54, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep: Benjiboi has just done an excellent job changing this article from a neologism/advert into an actual sourced article, including locations from around the US, history, refs, etc. Amazing job, Benjiboi! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 14:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. Benjiboi, if you could see the stunned look on my face right now .... this expanded article definitely asserts notability. TAnthony 14:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep: I must agree with SatyrTN and TAnthony. Any comments on this article prior to 13:43, 18 July 2007 are no longer relevant and, IMHO, should now be ignored. Benjiboi has indeed done an excellent job! Pdfpdf 15:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Brilliant job! Raystorm (¿Sí?) 16:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Recommend speedy keep – Very nice. Article obviously fixed. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 17:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I am glad that my nomination for deletion has resulted in an advertisement being turned into an article. Benjiboi deserves a slap on the back. Tovojolo 23:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - well sourced article, clear notability. --Belovedfreak 12:14, 19 July 2007 (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.