Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Man pod

:{{la|Man pod}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Man_pod Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Man pod}})

The subject of the article fails WP:SUSTAINED as a notable topic. It seems like just a flash-in-the-pan invention that will not see wide use. Even if it does, it is WP:TOOSOON. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 02:20, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

• I tend to agree, but I think this falls into a larger topic of spaces created for men in or adjacent to women's clothing stores. Perhaps we should have an article on that. bd2412 T 03:25, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
• :A merge/redirect to man cave for now, maybe? That's if the idea isn't too new. --Izno (talk) 12:44, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
• :There's also men's spaces, but that appears to be a wreck of an article. --Izno (talk) 12:45, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
• ::I don't think that would work, as man cave implies that it's part of a home, and this is a different concept. So is men's spaces, which says it only applies to "non-westernized" countries._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 14:56, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  FITINDIA  04:20, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  FITINDIA  04:20, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

• ::::I edited at Men's spaces to allow for those existing in Westernized countries too, though it may be accurate that such spaces are more important in many non-Westernized countries. --doncram 22:03, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
• Merge, to Men's spaces i suggest. These kind of men's spaces in the shopping environment do exist, e.g. I have seen waiting areas with men's magazines at some stores, but the "Man pod" name is not itself highly notable, separately, it seems to be one brand for such. --doncram 22:03, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
• Comment - I think this represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the term "men's spaces". While you are taking it literally, the article uses it as more of a metaphor for "spaces associated with manhood". A "man pod" is ostensibly designed for men, but it can be used by anyone, without judgement, making it not much of a "men's space" beyond the marketing copy - it could easily be called a "game pod" and nothing of value would be lost. Compare and contrast that to a men's room, something with a far greater connotation of gender._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 11:14, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
• Merge. I agree with Doncram. Also it is basically a 'small' man space, this does not mean it has to have a separate article claiming it is separate concept. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) -  12:47, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
• {{ping|Aguyintobooks}} Again, there's a difference between something claiming to be a men's space and something actually being a men's space. The idea that a man pod should be for men is just a marketing gimmick and a somewhat misandrist one at that. Are they suggesting it would be of little or no utility to say, bored children, or women who want to relax while a man shops? And even putting anything about "man pods" in the article would be WP:UNDUE considering how non notable it is._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 18:09, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

• {{reply to|Zxcvbnm}} - I wasn't aware that due weight neutrality was based on notability, or that the content of article had to be notable... Also it seems highly irresponsible to abandon children in the middle of a busy shopping mall, what is your point? Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) -  18:59, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
• {{reply to|Aguyintobooks}}If you assume that there's someone staffing the booth keeping women out, then that person would also be able to watch any kids. If you assume nobody is staffing the booth then it would be open to anyone, the idea of it being men only is moot, and it shouldn't be a men's space regardless._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 19:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
• I didnt realise they had staff, my bad. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) -  19:27, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
• I didn't say they had staff; I don't know either way. But assuming they don't, there's no way to prevent women from using the "pods". So... not sure how this is a "men's space" beyond them just saying it should be used by men._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 19:40, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
• To ZXCVBNM, your comments to me and here indicate your concern that this "Man pod" space is not necessarily 100% perfectly enforced to only ever allow males to enter, while you suppose that other man spaces in other cultures are 100%. Hey, it doesn't matter. Clearly by the name of this it is meant for men. That is how it is marketed, that is its purpose, that is enough, so it is a man's space. And my guess is it is mostly used by men. If you wanted to go to extremes you could say that various men's sports are not men's sports, because there might not be uniform international application and enforcement of DNA testing and whatever else is needed according to your definition of 100% maleness, as becomes an issue sometimes such as for Renée Richards' participation in U.S. Open tennis. Some exception(s) to the usual does not mean we cannot call a space meant for men as being a "men's space". I mean, you don't want for the staff at the Man pod in the mall to be demanding people go through x-ray machines to see their gender-specific body parts, or anything else, right? --doncram 19:47, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
• Merge - I agree with the above, this is basically a bit of marketing fluff with very little that's new or distinctive here (i.e. it's not notable). Merging will suit it nicely. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:28, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.