Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Puppy love

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Puppy love}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Puppy love}})

As noted in a message on the page, 'This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic.' The article contains a non-dictionary definition and characteristics of puppy love, a sub-article on puppy love in China related to China's marriage age laws, and statistics which do not mention puppy love of Taiwan, China and the United States. Though the article has existed for a long time, it is still rated as 'Start-class' on Wikipedia's content assessment scale (see the Talk page). The article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignemnt between 24 January 2023 and 19 May 2023, and yet is still rated as a 'Start-class'. There was a requested move on 9 February 2023. The article is not encyclopedic in nature, and is minimally informative, I'd recommend deleting it. Re34646 (talk) 03:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
• Keep The article is definitely in poor shape, but I think the concept of 'puppy love' or a 'crush' is fairly trivially notable. The article cites plenty of sources in gender/sexuality studies, literary studies, and adolescent medicine, and I have no doubt at all that there are many, many more sources out there discussing the idea of childhood/adolescent infatuation. A lot of the material on China does need to be cut or slimmed down, but I don't think the article is anywhere near bad enough for this to be a case of WP:TNT. MCE89 (talk) 01:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
• Keep as per {{U|MCE89}}. Short of a disaster, which this isn't, AfD is not for editing fixes. Literally hit songs, films, and books have been created on this topic. Bearian (talk) 16:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:40, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. The article is kind of crappy, but not enough to be WP:TNT in my book. There’s a way to salvage this without building it from the ground up. RakdosWitch (talk) 06:02, 13 January 2025 (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.