Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abraham Lincoln's Sexual Orientation

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 Delete.

I count:

Delete or redirect ::Supergolden::, Cúchullain
Redirect: Vizjim
Delete RJH, CanadianCaesar, Mithebt (redlink user, valid), Peter Grey, Pavel, Crumbsucker, Daniel
Delete and redirect: FloNight.

The 'deletes' have it. kingboyk 22:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abraham Lincoln's Sexual Orientation[edit]

Appears to have been created in respnse to AFD discussion on Robert Baden-Powell's sexual orientation. Topic is already covered in the The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln page. Delete ::Supergolden:: 15:06, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am the article's author. Would be happy to substitute a redirect to The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln article. Vizjim 15:17, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - oh the fun world of process now. Someone is sure to complain no matter what we do.

a) nominator could withdraw AFD and we could do the redirect.

b) we could do the redirect, removing the AFD tag with author but not nominator consent

c) We could let this AFD go on for a week, get a few more votes and still do the redirect.

I almost was WP:BOLD, but sure that would irritate the most. -Jcbarr 16:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

C. Assume good faith. -ikkyu2 (talk) 16:51, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sod it, I've done it (WP:BOLD, and all that). Request nominator to withdraw nomination.Vizjim 16:58, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to say Be Bold, but you beat me to it. ::Supergolden:: 17:04, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — Don't redirect. — RJH 21:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to the book. --Cúchullain t / c 22:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete without prejudice for its recreation; while I've no doubt it would be an encyclopedic topic, like Shakespeare's sexuality was a Did you know? article, this version tells me very little. Would make an odd redirect, too. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 01:15, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless there's really any more to say on the subject. -- Mithent 01:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: One book raising the question on such flimsy evidence isn't enough, not when Lincoln lived in an age when only the rich could afford personal rooms or furniture. Peter Grey 03:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Close this discussion, surely? Nominator and original page creator have agreed on a redirect. We're not discussing the entry for The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln - that's a legitimate entry till someone nominates it for deletion. I don't know how to close the discussion, but surely an administrator or the original nominator can do so? See Jcbarr's comments above as well.Vizjim 09:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete snippet from a nn book does't make encyclopedic article. Pavel Vozenilek 00:57, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Made to prove a point. Crumbsucker 09:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a title AND as a redirect. --DanielCD 14:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and re-direct question stand alone article on this content. FloNight 14:56, 3 March 2006 (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.