Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marriage (post modern)

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 Merge to Marriage and delete. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-08 21:30Z

Marriage (post modern)[edit]

Article appears to be some form of POV fork. Post modern marriage does not appear to be a recognised concept. The article contains no information not already in Marriage and Same-sex marriage. WJBscribe 01:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you ask first? Nkras 01:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with marriage. This article doesn't explain the concept of postmodern marriage enough to justify its own article, and includes nothing that couldn't be said in the main marriage article. Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 01:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Maybe a response to Traditional marriage movement. But no one talks about a Post-modern marriage movement. The world is simply not that symmetrical. (If I'm wrong and people do use this term, the article needs to cite reliable sources for it.) Sdsds 02:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm not seeing the point of this at all, but if there is one, I'd love to hear it. --John Kenneth Fisher 02:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. POV fork, seems to have been created by a proponent of the "traditional marriage movement" to further his own agenda. Krimpet 02:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Goldfritha 03:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—maybe this article could be written? Although, what has been written so is included in the marriage article so there is no need for a merge, and no justification for the duplication of information. Unless something is added to this article that explains how this post-modern marriage concept differs from marriage it should be deleted--Riferimento 04:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect information already in other articles, seems redundant. Wooyi 05:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant. Nothing to merge that I can see. Jeffpw 05:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all. Semperf 06:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Why does the title even include "(post modern)"? Where is that even mentioned in the article? Tuvok^^{Talk|Desk|Contribs} 08:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems a "traditional marriage" advocate spun off the current Marriage content into a new article, probably to facilitate defining his preferred vision of "marriage" there, and to be able to claim that same-sex marriages etc. aren't real marriage, but "post modern" marriage. Krimpet 09:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no need to redirect, no need to pretend that this is even an actual topic. See WP:POVFORK, and specifically the nomination argument at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marriage (Judeo-Christian), which applies equally to this article, as they were both created at the same time to avoid consensus at Marriage. — coelacan talk — 10:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all above, and also because it contains absolutely no references to the postmodernism in the title. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there is no such thing as a postmodern marriage concept Flammingo^Parliament 11:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete as a POV fork. Marriage can and should incorporate this information. Mango juice^talk 15:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NEO. No evidence that the term is in widespread use as required per WP:NEO. My only issue here is notability and verifiability as shown by sources. No comment on the inherent existence or legitimacy of the concept, or on reason for article creation. --Shirahadasha 17:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A strange piece of redundancy. .V. _[_Talk|Email] 20:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a POV fork, sort out the differences on the Marriage talk page --Steve _(Slf67)^talk 02:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as NEO _SUBWAYguy 22:32, 6 February 2007 (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.