Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sexuality and gender

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Sexuality and gender. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Sexuality and gender|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Sexuality and gender. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sexuality and gender/archive

Purge page cache

watch

In addition to AfDs, this page also tracks Categories for discussion, Templates for deletion, Miscellany for deletion, and Deletion review, but these discussions are not automatically expanded here. You will have to follow the links from here to the discussion pages. Instructions for adding these discussions to this page are provided in the comments when you press "edit".

For important information about categorization:

Articles for deletion

Forced orgasm

AfDs for this article:

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

Does not seem to be notable. Kinkly looks like a healthline-like site, i.e. unreliable. The Guardian article doesn't mention this and isn't even about it. A search on google scholar shows only passing mentions and unreliable sources. A search on google news does not bring up significant reliable coverage either. KnowDeath (talk) 00:48, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The previous discussion on this contains no convincing arguments in favour of keeping. KnowDeath (talk) 00:51, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:INDISCRIMINATE: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. This is not merely mentioning that this practice exists. This is a mini-instruction guideline with explicit instructions and images of how to do this. — Maile (talk) 02:05, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:33, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The topic of the article is important and noteworthy from a sexual, medical and perhaps historical point of view. Although the article basically does not refer to this content well, a Google Books search can list many sources. However, unsourced content and unhelpful images should be removed.

Edard Socceryg (talk) 00:42, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The topic of the article is important and noteworthy from a sexual, medical and perhaps historical point of view

How? I couldn't find anything that corroborates this and you haven't provided anything either.

a Google Books search can list many sources

All the books I can see are erotica or written by somebody who isn't an academic expert. KnowDeath (talk) 02:49, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this is a fairly minor topic within BDSM and kink. Most of this short article is unsourced and the sources available look poor, giving little likelihood of improvement in the future. -- Polly Tunnel (talk) 12:38, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suicide of Charlotte Fosgate

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

Very sad to read, but unfortunately not encyclopedically notable – WP:NOTMEMORIAL, WP:NOTNEWS, WP:ROUTINE. Prod removed by IP without reason. Reywas92^Talk 14:25, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:36, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:36, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:36, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:37, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - coverage in sources has lasted from May 2 through June 8, 2025 - indicating that this is not news, although whether it's independent coverage is still up for debate. Bearian (talk) 16:39, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Random suicide posted online. Very sad, but doesn't appear to be notable. Coverage is mostly local to the area. Oaktree b (talk) 19:17, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Could be noted on any page dealing with anti-trans discrimination due to the online hate response and coverage, and would be a way to use the screenshot of the "it's a pretty view" post.Oathed (talk) 19:21, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't that be a copyright violation? KnowDeath (talk) 01:57, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not only would this be a copyright violation, using a suicide victim's last words as an illustration on a tangentially related page is just morally bankrupt. Flounder fillet (talk) 14:54, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and Oaktree. KnowDeath (talk) 02:09, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTFORUM/blatant trolling. —Fortuna, imperatrix 10:59, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I think that the reaction to it is notable, even if it isn't included in this article. In case you didn't know, Matt Walsh and StoneToss- the latter being a neo-nazi cartoonist- were openly celebrating her death. I think right now the article is basically a stub. If it gets expanded, it can be judged properly. 73.83.67.20 (talk) 00:11, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Stonetoss is not a neo-nazi for your clarification. The article is disheartening but this should be moved to another page instead of its own page as it is not notable. Utuuv (talk) 02:53, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

'toss won. this brimstone should be removed from the website permanently 27.79.153.194 (talk) 03:09, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
used his own ip award Utuuv (talk) 03:10, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
obsessed with mi o algo 27.79.153.194 (talk) 03:12, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
or something Utuuv (talk) 03:14, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bolu Okupe

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

Fails WP:BIO. There is no information or sources stating of this person is either a model or activist. The article does not mention any fashion shows or brands that he participated in, nor does it mention any activism that he has done. He is only notable as a son of a former presidential aide which makes this WP:INVALIDBIO. This person is not notable. Sackkid (talk) 21:35, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sexuality and gender, and Nigeria. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:22, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - there is some coverage in reliable sources; how significant is debatable. Bearian (talk) 04:28, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Person A has a relationship with well-known person B, such as being a spouse or child, is not a reason for a standalone article on A (unless significant coverage can be found on A); relationships do not confer notability. The coverage that you are referring to all mirror that this is a gay man who happens to be the son of a former presidential aide. But there is no actual notability in that. I would say it would be more appropriate to merge this with Doyin Okupe but it is already there. Sackkid (talk) 06:35, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:30, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -Fails GNG. Notability is not inherited. Shoerack (talk) 15:32, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 11:56, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Blaise

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

Fails WP:BIO. A lot of this stuff is trivial. The Time source does not feature him as the topic of discussion, The Pink News source simply mentioned that he was one of the attendees but does not state that he organized the protest, The Bloomberg source does not exist, The Out magazine source was written by them (Blaise); which leads that this article could have been created and edited by Matthew Blaise. "In 2020, they were a winner of The Future Awards Africa "Prize for Leading Conversations" but the source does not mention him winning any award of the sort. Also, the page receives very little traffic. If this person is an actual activist, there should be more focus on what they actually changed in the course of history and human rights. But once you take away the sentences with the meaningless sources, you are left with trivial information about where he is allegedly attending college. Sackkid (talk) 02:41, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sexuality and gender, and Nigeria. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:15, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Bloomberg source exists and link is still active. There are many articles and publications about them, and their nonprofit is quite active as well. Iseaseeshells (talk) 09:07, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, none of them say what he has actually done as an "activist", they are simply mirroring each other. I saw several pages that says he founded The Oasis Project but there are no articles that elaborate on it, say who it has helped, or what it has actually done. Many publications do not do their own research to see if the information given to them is credible. They are simply calling it "a Nigeria-based registered non-profit organization" but it is not registered with the Nigerian CAC or Global Giving, so it is not an establishment. So again, these publications are mirroring each other. Example: "I believe the sky is yellow and pink because you told me. You believe the sky is yellow and pink because I told you." Sackkid (talk) 22:57, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I hear where you’re coming from, he is active with his nonprofit, Obodo, which is registered with CAC Iseaseeshells (talk) 17:02, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There would still need to be significant coverage from reliable sources in order to support the claim that Matthew Blaise is notable by Wikipedia standards. Also do you know Matthew Blaise personally? Sackkid (talk) 20:41, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 21:22, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:GNG. Shoerack (talk) 15:33, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 12:02, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable and fails GNG. Go4thProsper (talk) 23:39, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Categories, Templates, Redirects for deletion

none at this time

Miscellany for deletion

Proposed deletions

Deletion review