Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sexual economy

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 delete. Stifle (talk) 15:05, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sexual economy[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poorly written opinion piece of no value to anyone. Tiggum (talk) 05:21, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect or merge It looks to me that the best action is to merge or redirect this article with Sex industry because both articles address simary things.--Jeffrd10 (talk) 13:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, possibly redirect the title but the content is too POV for a merge. Reads like an angry blog post. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: this topic appears to be significantly covered based on the sources provided. It does seem to be a bit POV but Wikipedia does include articles about particular points of view if it can be done neutrally, which I think it can here. I don't think Sex industry is a valid merge target either - this article is about a theory comparing sexual interactions between men and women to economic concepts, whereas the sex industry is a particular set of occupations and products. They're probably related but not the same thing. Social exchange theory would be a better target if we're going to do a merge, but I think we could make this a decent article on its own. Ivanvector (talk) 18:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- If there's an article possible on this topic (and I'm not convinced), it will need to be totally rewritten, as the present content is completely unacceptable for Wikipedia, with really out-there statements like "Even though women wished for sexual freedom, their ultimate goal is to get married in the future." I'm actually amazed the article has lasted this long. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:45, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Original essay. Carrite (talk) 06:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.