RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Aromantic

Aromantic | Result: Redirect to Asexual#Aromantic

Aromantic (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete

1. The subtypes are just absurd nonces. Aromantic should be (possibly) be redirected to asexuality. Bongolian (talk) 18:55, 29 December 2015 (UTC) revisedBongolian (talk) 19:55, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Merge/redirect

1. This content was lifted from Asexual and made a separate page. It was probably happier on the Asexual page (and it can probably be shortened a bit, too). Carpetsmoker (talk) 21:06, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
2. Merge, and only terms with scientific sources should be kept: Aromantic, Demiromantic, and Grey-romantic [1]. All else is cullable. Fuzzy "Cat" Potato, Jr. (talk/stalk) 21:39, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

   If we follow the precise model prescribed here by FCP, I move for a merger back into the main Asexual article. Though, again, without the fluff - and with better sources for what we keep. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 21:41, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

3. Merge. Don't care what's done with the fluff. --Castaigne2 (talk) 15:15, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
4. Merge. TheAmazingSkeptic (talk) 16:34, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
5. Merge per FCP's idea. --JorisEnter (talk) 19:19, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

   It's already done. αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 19:50, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Goat

1. I can't find any decent sources on the term "aromantic" itself, never mind all these sub-terms. If this is correct, then the conclusions I draw from that are not in favor of keeping the article as is nor for merging it back into the Asexuality article. Are the current contents of the Aromantic page basically just original research that never went viral? I'm honestly just wondering. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 19:04, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Just saw this

Aromanticism is not the same as asexuality, although it is often coupled with asexuality. They are two distinct things and does deserve its own article. But I suppose its far too late now. Maybe when more attention is given to aromanticism as a sub-orientation we can resplit the article. Asarelah (talk) 22:30, 1 February 2016 (UTC)