Talk:Xe (pronoun)/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Proposed deletion

Xe (pronoun) was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This question is no longer current. Further comments should be made below the archived discussion rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS

Original research. RickK 06:01, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)

  • This doesn't appear to be entirely original research (one off-Wikipedia reference exists) but is definitely not that important. Redirect to gender-neutral pronoun, maybe merge a very brief mention of it there. —No-One Jones (m) 06:08, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Found one internal reference to Xe at Sie and hir#Variants. Agree with merge to gender-neutral pronoun and redirect. -- Netoholic @ 06:17, 2004 Oct 31 (UTC)
  • I felt this would be inapprpriate in the gender-neutral pronouns page because it is a survey of how gender neutral pronouns are handled in other languages and not of specific pronouns; also because Sie_and_hir has its own page, it looked as if each gender neutral pronoun has its own page. I couldn't just add xe/xyr/xem to that page because it is already titled after specific gender neutral pronouns. It would probably be more appropriate to have all the gender neutral pronouns on one page, but on a page separate from gender-neutral pronouns because that page is a survey of how different languages handle gender neutral pronouns. I believe a new page should be created that should include xe/xem/xyr and sie/hir, and I believe the Sie and hir page should be redirected to that as well as Xe (pronoun). Other references that mention the xe pronoun: [[1]] [[2]] [[3]] Q0 07:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    Two of those are Wikipedia mirrors. —No-One Jones (m) 19:12, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirect; for all we know, these terms are original coinages. Lacrimosus 20:41, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • They're not, I don't think. This is an article from 2000 that describes the forms. It seems to have caught on in discussions of autism. Keep. --jpgordon{gab} 07:42, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Changing vote. The information is expandable; perhaps a section in gender-neutral pronouns called something like "Synthetic gender-neutral pronouns]] would be the right place in that article for that (and sie/hir and so on.) Merge to gender-neutral pronouns. --jpgordon{gab} 22:46, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Insufficient (near zero) evidence that this has caught on. I see the article itself has no external references. To get a article for something like this, there should be some combination of substantial web hits and substantial print references; this article has neither. Wile E. Heresiarch 20:17, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. A known proposal. Mikkalai 06:49, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Notable proposal, no namespace confusion. --L33tminion | (talk) 16:17, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)

End archived discussion -- Graham ☺ | Talk 16:19, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

No consensus, huh? Hmmm. Six people agreed that it doesn't need to be a separate page, and that a merge-and-redirect to some article on GNP proposals would be appropriate. One person correctly pointed out that 'xe' is mondo obscure, even by GNP-argument standards (seriously, Google this and any other GNP proposal, and just look at the results), and hinted at the doctrine that Wikipedia is not a collection of every fricken fact on the face of the earth. (The foregoing has been lightly paraphrased.) Two people argued for keeping it on the basis that it is known. (So what? Everything is known. Welcome to the Google era.) And one person seems to have been unclear on the difference between the questions 'Would I like people to use 'xe' in the future?' and 'Ought Wikipedia to have a fully independent article documenting 'xe' right now?'

To put it bluntly: Wasn't there a pretty good consensus on what to do about this? Unless there's something tacitly understood by all of you, and not by me (perhaps about the difference between 'xe' and every other unadopted epicene-pronoun proposal of recent centuries), it looks overwhelmingly clear that 'xe' ought to be with several other such proposals in an article (possibly not yet written, certainly not yet in final form) about them all, and that this page ought to be divested of all content but a redirect. I invite comment on exactly where to merge to, and exactly where the redirect should point, until the end of June 2005. At that time I will boldly do as seems best (which will not be outright deletion, which would circumvent a legally failed VfD, but it will bring this information into standardish Wikipedia practice). eritain 23:28, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)