Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gender Inequality

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 (but move to gender inequality per naming conventions). — TKD::Talk 08:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gender Inequality (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Basically a fork (likely biased, too, haven't read through it) of the various thing at Gender gap. Circeus (talk) 00:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete; half of it is already covered in Income disparity and Sexual dimorphism. It does mention social disparity, so I'm wondering if that could be salvaged... Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 01:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect someone might search for it under this term, so instead of deleting it, I suggest a redirect to Gender gap. --Arcanios (talk) 11:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • What about the capitalization issue? Circeus (talk) 18:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think it should be moved to Gender inequality, then redirected. As it isn't a title, most people won't be searching for Gender Inequality. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 03:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect Someone would almost certainly search this item. Twenty Years 03:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Gender inequality is an independent topic and a major research area in its own right. It has its own foundational theories. Several theorists, for example, propose that gender inequality is the underlying basis for all other forms of social inequality. There's much more to gender inequality than just income disparities, and sexual dimorphism is a related but separate concept. Valerius (talk) 04:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This is a valid related article. Any bias problems can be fixed through editing. Entire books have been written about this topic, so it is notable and verifiable. The article was only created on 2nd December by what looks like a new editor who tried to fill a large gap in Wikipedia's coverage, and wasn't given a chance to improve. The article already has 11 sources, which is much more than Wikipedia articles that have existed for years. Bláthnaid 11:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Valerius and Blathnaid. --JayJasper (talk) 21:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  
• Keep per Valerius, Blathnaid, and JayJasper. Good information source for students, references helpful for finding more in-depth works, possibly change so that it can be searched with all lower case letters as well--TarheelD (talk) 03:47, 8 December 2007 (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.