Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Women and violence in video games

:{{la|Women and violence in video games}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Women_and_violence_in_video_games Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Women and violence in video games}})

Unsourced essay/WP:OR. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 17:08, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

• Delete. Wow, Arcanum? That's a pretty obscure choice for an academic study. Anyway, this looks like original research in its purest form – surveys and analysis performed by the article's author. Though it lacks inline citations, it does make reference to published research. The problem is that it's difficult to tell where the published research ends and the original research begins. I think this is kind of an interesting topic, but, sadly, Wikipedia is not a collection of things that NinjaRobotPirate finds interesting. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
• I'm willing to strike my vote after the rewrite and subsequent expansion. It looks a lot more like a encyclopedia article now. Any further problems can be addressed through normal editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
• Weak Delete - I said I would try to clean up this article but I really didn't know where to start. Do you even bother tagging things with {{cn}} if the entire article is unreferenced? Anyways, article does suffer from WP:OR problems, looking at sentences and phrases such as "This is a clear representation on how..." and "...women play games that are clearly targeted at a male gaming audience...", etc. However, this is not a reason for deletion unless the article cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, per WP:DEL-REASON. The article makes reference to research but never cites it, and the entire article reads a lot like an essay to me. Pishcal — ♣ 04:34, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
• Keep and Improve - I have removed the OR, added full citations, and fixed some of the tone issues just now. The topic is notable and there is tons of academic research that can be added to demonstrate notability & improve the article. I'll continue working on it over the next few days, it should become apparent that this is a definite "keep" quite quickly. Fyddlestix (talk) 15:51, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
• I would going to add some citations, but I gave up after the third edit conflict. Maybe you could try making fewer rapid edits in a row? Anyway, the article looks better, but it's still problematic. I'll look at it again later. I've given up hope of making an edit on it today. And now I got an edit conflict trying to write this, too. Holy crap. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

:::{{re|NinjaRobotPirate}} Sorry about the edit conflicts! You're right that it's still problematic. I'm sure it can be cleaned up with enough effort though. Fyddlestix (talk) 18:34, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. ({{find video game sources short|Women and violence in video games|linksearch=}}) • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

• Weak delete - This is someone's research paper. The author makes it clear at User:HaydenLCase/sandbox. I don't see evidence that "women and violence in video games" is a distinctive topic from "violence in video games", the studies cited cover both genders, so why would we cover it separately? Sadly, our video game violence article is buried in the unreadable dreck that is video game controversies, but anything useful could also be merged into women and video games. - hahnchen 12:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
• Delete - Just isn't notable enough. --☣Anarchyte☣ 06:37, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

• Strong delete - once again I argue that WP:THISISMYCLASSESSAY should be criteria for speedy deletion. —Мандичка^YO 😜 14:17, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
• Delete: Conceptually impossible to lodge. The topic of the rewritten essay is "women and their differential response to violence in video games." The name of the article trips over misogyny in videogames ("violence toward women" in video games) and portrayals of violence toward women in video games and female-instigated violence in video games. This keyword (lemma) won't disentangle in a searchable way. It can only fold in in a larger article. Therefore, it would have to be merged, if it were inarguably solid. I don't think it is. Unfortunate, because I don't think there's anything wrong with the writing at present. Hithladaeus (talk) 14:27, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
• Delete A worthwhile essay. I learned some things from reading it. However the topic itself does not seem distinct enough for an encyclopedia article. (BTW and not related to the issue of deletion, violent female characters seem to be very popular and are not mentioned.) BayShrimp (talk) 16:05, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
• Merge The topics covered are already included in Women and video games and Gender representation in video games. The article appears to be an independent essay with no reference to the existing articles, perhaps a school paper. Its been improved a lot since the nomination, but still doesn't link in to the existing articles on the subject. Add the appropriate material to those articles. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:53, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
• Delete As essentially an essay, although some of the material might be usable elsewhere. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:05, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
• Comment. Geez. Going by the wall of delete votes, I've turned into a big pushover. Well, I guess it's still an essay at heart, but maybe something can be merged somewhere. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
• Delete as an original essay. Carrite (talk) 04:30, 6 June 2015 (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.