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. - Mailer Diablo 12:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Popular Yaoi Pairings[edit]

Popular Yaoi Pairings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Unsourced (WP:RS), unverifiable (WP:V) listcruft (WP:NOT) of "popular" gay pairings of anime characters. Considering 90+% of this list is mostly within a given series' fandom and not at all canon, it also fails WP:FICT. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 08:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. MER-C 09:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, and add original research to the above list-who decides what constitutes "popular"? Seraphimblade 10:36, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- Farix (Talk) 13:51, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Burn it to the ground -- Ned Scott 19:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete. Fanfiction is rarely, if ever, notable. --Dennisthe2 20:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strongest possible delete - I am amazed anyone thought this was a good idea for an article. --Haemo 22:09, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete immediately and ban whoever created it Aside from it being complete fantasy, and disgusting (incest???), there's potential libel for claiming homosexuality without strong evidence. --TommyOliver 22:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Burninante, drive them before you and hear the lamentations of their ticklish jihadists. But libel? Are fictional characters going to sue us now? --129.241.216.28 00:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Don't rule it out. More seriously though, the characters (fictional though they are) are not gay, and the point of an encyclopedia is to describe things as they are, not as someone wants them to be. --TommyOliver 00:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Oh. I just wanted to call into question your legal argument before you estalished some kind of consensus prescedent :-)--129.241.216.28 01:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per nom. --Squilibob 23:59, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete per WP:FAN, WP:OR, and WP:V. Most, if not all of this, is severely out of context, especially Lupin. Metrackle 00:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I couldn't even do a ((db-nocontext)), could I? --Dennisthe2 00:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Civility, please. Unverified? Yes. Original Research? Pretty much. They could be sourced by a survey of doujin titles. But doujin isn't usually notable enough for Wikipedia. As a group they may be notable, but it's OR if done on Wikipedia. Libel?!?!? Huh? This is "moral rights" territory. These characters, gay or not in the original series, are FREQUENTLY depicted in homosexual relationships in yaoi doujinshi. It would be against the original authors of this material, not Wikipedia which is simply re-printing an observation of a derivative work. Out of context? No. The context is yaoi doujinshi. It's a well known product of a Japanese sub-culture. --Kunzite 01:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• strong delete not notable LazyDaisy 13:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It's mostly if not all Fanfiction. (Duane543 22:35, 1 February 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.