RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Sex-positivity

Sex-positivity | Result: Keep

Sex-positivity (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete

1. Short and does no debunking Hedvigsen^{Skreonk here} 10:22, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
2. See above. Also haven't seen mission justification-Hastur! (talk) 07:04, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
3. Not really missional. Also, fuck articles with two navbars. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 16:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Keep

1. A relevant topic in countering myths about sex, SWERF bullshit, slut-shaming, and religious anti-sex propaganda, which are very missional subjects. A controversial topic where factual presentation is important. Not a perfect article (needs more discussion of porn and sex work), but it has some information and size is long enough to keep. --Annanoon (talk) 10:42, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
2. Seems fine.𝔖𝔲𝔪𝔪𝔞 𝔄𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔬𝔩𝔬𝔤𝔦𝔠𝔞 (𝔮𝔲𝔢𝔯𝔢𝔩𝔦𝔰) (𝔰𝔠𝔯𝔦𝔭𝔱𝔲𝔯𝔞) 19:59, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
3. Needs more citations, but otherwise OK to keep. Bongolian (talk) 20:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
4. Needs some work, but otherwise relevant enough. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 12:43, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
5. Judge Dredd (talk) 14:31, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
6. Tuxer (talk) 10:20, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
7. Things can always be improved. But I have no problems with this, the fact that is relatively short has no bearing on whether it should be deleted or not. Many articles start as stubs. I would say that "authoritarians" as a group usually have a problem with anything "sex positive" - so what's not to like?Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 10:38, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
8. Flandres (talk) 17:08, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Goat

• Since it is pretty short, I removed the rating.--Hedvigsen^{Skreonk here} 06:28, 24 September 2020 (UTC)