Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dresscode (BDSM)

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 delete. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:20, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dresscode (BDSM)

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

Pure WP:Original Research / WP:NOTHOWTO. Tagged as {{original research}} and {{unreferenced}} since October 2008. Toddst1 (talk) 20:18, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Dress code, though that article isn't much better than Dresscode (BDSM).--Northernhenge (talk) 21:00, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:44, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as this is an OR essay on clothing fetishes; allowing this mess anywhere near dress code would set off a spasm of WP:UNDUE way beyond the single sentence that (ahem) covers the topic there now. Mangoe (talk) 01:54, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Pure OR. Kevin (talk) 05:06, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:OR. This sentence particularly is pure opinion and non-encyclopaedic language and sums up the overall problems: "A normal vanilla guest wanting to enter a BDSM event solely to ogle at others merely has to invest in kinky clothing, he/she does not have to actually have a kinky mindset". I am not opposed to the subject matter in any way but such an article would need to be absolutely neutral in tone, be reliably sourced and totally avoid BDSM jargon - not being familiar with "insider terminology", this article somewhat confused me. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 09:25, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Even if the article is deleted, I feel the subject should be mentioned in the article dress code, but heavily shortened. A couple of sentences or so, at the most, and omitting the details about accepted clothing and the criticism. JIP | Talk 23:14, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We'll need reliable sources to back up anything to be merged. Toddst1 (talk) 01:55, 14 October 2011 (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.