Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Straight marriage

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 back to marriage. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] straight marriage

For right now, this article doesn't seem very encyclopedic. It should either be made encyclopedic or it be deleted. Voortle 01:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as a dictionary definition with very little potential for expansion.--Isotope23 01:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete dicdef. Gazpacho 01:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Revert to redirect to marriage. It is a likely search term; I got 89,600 Google hits. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 01:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Revert to redirect ^^ -- Librarianofages 02:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Revert to redirect as above. --Allen 02:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Revert per above. SM247^{My Talk} 02:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Revert per above AdamBiswanger1 03:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect seems fine. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 03:56, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• revert to redirect per all above. ~Chris (talk/e@) 04:07, 29 June 2006 (UTC) Delete as dicdef. Don't redirect as marriage covers gay marriage too. ~Chris (talk/e@) 18:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect Delete. It's a dicdef, and it's somewhat likely that the user could be using a potential redirect vote to violate WP:POINT. --Coredesat talk 04:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. To me, this comes across as some sort of contrived joke. Black-Velvet 10:09, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Comment does redirect imply that to Wikipedia marriage and straight marriage are the same thing? Half :-) Weregerbil 10:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  • They are the same thing. A marriage by definition is between a man and a woman, hence "straight marriage" is a redundancy. Grook 16:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
    • I'm going to guess you don't live in Massachussetts...--Isotope23 19:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  • You know, I think that's the point of the article... Someone made it to make us turn it into a redirect just so they can prove a WP:POINT. --Agamemnon2 11:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
    • I'm changing my vote to delete, after thinking about that for a bit. --Coredesat talk 11:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
      • Exactly... the whole creation of this appears to be a violation of WP:POINT, hence I don't agree with a revert.--Isotope23 12:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
        • I don't know, you're idea sounds like conspiracycruft. I don't think there's a consipiracy of straight people attempting to utilize reverse psychology to get you to redirect this article.--Strothra 16:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
          • Ha, does it really come off like I think there is a broad conspiracy to elicit a redirect vote via applied reverse psychology? I simply meant that creating this article as a redirect to marriage appears to me to be representative of a POV or WP:POINT edit... as does the contributor's one other contribution. I don't mean to WP:BITE or not WP:AGF, just seems a bit suspicious. I'm not vehemently opposed to the redirect or anything, I just am not supporting it either, if that makes any sense.--Isotope23 19:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
            • haha, gotcha. It was just the way I read your comment at first. My comment was actually moreso a reply to Agamemnon2. --Strothra 15:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to marriage. --Strothra 16:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to marriage, then make bent marriage a redirect to gay marriage. ;-) — RJH (talk) 17:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete (do not redirect) unless something can be said about it. (If it becomes a redirect, consider this a delete vote on RfD as misleading.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to marriage. Redirecting takes no position on other types of marriage. -- Infrogmation 17:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Redirect is the same as creating a new defintion. Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a usage or jargon guide. (policy) Ste4k 19:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to marriage. Reply to previous vote: don't be silly. Creating a redirect is not the same as creating a new definition, and certainly not the same as endorsing a particular political position. It simply means that if anyone is searching for "straight marriage", and types those words in, can find the information they want (and much more) in the article "marriage". Don't let political correctness destroy the usefulness of this encyclopedia. Ekjon Lok 01:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and create a Redirect to marriage. At this time, this is not a separate phenomenon from marriage. If the LBG advocacy group gets its way, in another generation ... but this sentence can only end with a crystal ball type comment, and we don't use those as the basis for present decisions. If it becomes a separate phenomenon, the editing crew at that time can deal with it then. Delete because the history adds nothing, redirect because it is a possible search term. GRBerry 01:38, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and DO NOT REDIRECT. Redirection would encourage people to do this sort of thing for the sake of WP:POINT. Penelope D 03:25, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and vehemently DO NOT REDIRECT. This is a terrible precedent for POV-pushing redirects, at a time when it's become a (suprisingly) big issue here in the U.S. (Neither should there be other similar redirects to marriage.) Grandmasterka 20:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Transwiki to Wiktionary and change to a {{wi}} soft-redirect to the Wiktionary entry. This should avoid WP:POINT problems whilst still providing information if somebody searches for it. --ais523 07:45, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect after all we can link to gay marriage, why not straight marriage --Robdurbar 18:00, 4 July 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.