Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Misogyny in hip hop culture

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. JForget 02:53, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Misogyny in hip hop culture[edit]

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

Though this is sourced, it is still an essay-like piece (see WP:NOT.) Also, this piece isn't objective or balanced; it would require a fundamental rewrite in order to be encyclopedic. WordyGirl90 16:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I need to admit that I, too, believe this is a very worthy topic, but that one of the reasons I brought it to AfD was to bring a bad article to community attention. I'm a little daunted at the task of taking on a re-write myself. WordyGirl90 22:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is certainly a valid topic for an encyclopaedia article – much has been written about it in reputable sources, some of which we have included. Although I take the nominators point that the article may require a fundamental rewrite, I do not agree with the premise that the encyclopedia would benefit from the removal of the problematic material. At the extreme, stubbing to a line or two with the references would still be a better outcome than deletion. Skomorokh 17:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article as it stands reads like an essay and not as a valid encyclopedia article. Remove from mainspace and rewrite.--WaltCip (talk) 17:39, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why not do the rewriting in mainspace, isn't that the whole point of Wikipedia? It's not so outrageously offensive that it needs to be removed, like if it was an advert or something. --Pontificalibus (talk) 17:55, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Needs some vigorous editing, but that's no reason to delete.--Pontificalibus (talk) 17:52, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. It is well documented, but it uses relatively few sources. I'd be much more comfortable with a wider variety of sources for a topic like this. It has a WP:SYNTH feel to it, but I can't really get to the point of calling it synth. Niteshift36 (talk) 17:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Skomorokh, as this is a suitable topic for any encyclopedia. RFerreira (talk) 23:45, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, good topic, the subject of much discussion in the media over the years. Everyking (talk) 08:18, 12 February 2010 (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.