Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wife acceptance factor

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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:42, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wife acceptance factor

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This article has one reliable source. Furthermore, the topic does not seem to be that notable. RPI2026F1 (talk) 04:39, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. RPI2026F1 (talk) 04:39, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't see why these top specialist sources should not be considered RS. Nor do I agree with the nom's opinion that the subject is not notable - the sources seem to think it is. Is this because it is about womens' views? At the least it should be merged somewhere. Please notify relevant projects. Johnbod (talk) 05:28, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think maybe it can be reworded to be more gender-neutral. RPI2026F1 (talk) 13:15, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You're making the assumption that it can be made more gender-neutral. If reliable sources exist for a "Husband Acceptance Factor", and it's appropriate to include in this article, sure, make the article more gender-neutral. Until and unless that happens, Keep this article and keep it as Wife Acceptance Factor. Ylee (talk) 01:56, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - seems like there are plenty of books and academic references that use and define the term. I don't really like it as it seems quite sexist. But it's a thing. JMWt (talk) 11:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Radio. RPI2026F1 (talk) 13:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's definitely a thing, despite the obvious sexism. There are more sources to be found than have been cited in the article, for instance this 2015 piece in the well-known industry magazine Sound & Vision, and this discussion in the book The Smart Wife from MIT Press in 2021. Binksternet (talk) 03:09, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't like it, but its a thing. If it's broken, fix it instead of deleting it. There are more sources that could be cited, as @Binksternet pointed out. Idevjoe (talk) 16:09, 18 December 2022 (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.