Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay rights in Brazil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. SynergeticMaggot 00:09, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gay rights in Brazil

Delete or at least merge with something, this one-sentence vanity article adds nothing on its own. Complete self-serving trash. Courtney Akins 01:23, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep the article is a pretty poor stub at the moment, but should remain for expansion: there is plenty to be said on the subject, and Wiki has a series of "Gay Rights in [Country X]" which is intended to be comprehensive. It's certainly not "vanity" as it doesn't promote any non-notable person or organization. It's just skimpy in its present form. DanB DanD 02:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Ok, but fair enough, lets merge into Human rights in Brazil for now then split the article off on its own once its hit "critical mass."Courtney Akins 02:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
    • That's self-contradictory. Delete and merge is illegal under the GFDL. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Courtney, you're the nominator, we already know you want to delete it. DanB DanD 02:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
      • Also, I have to say that the "complete self-serving trash" comment strikes me as a tad inappropriate. I would urge the nominator to strike that and reword it to sound a bit more in keeping with wikiquette. — NMChico24 03:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete and merge Not sure what to merge into though. I guess the suggestion above makes sense. --Wafulz 02:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep being focussed on laws and constitutions, the article is neither trash nor vanity(!). Just as valid as Gay rights in Canada or Same-sex marriage in California. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge with Human rights in Brazil. Once the information because extensive, then recreate the article. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and Expand The article is a stub, but there are tons of stubs on Wikipedia. The only reason to delete a stub is if there's no possibility to expand the article, or if the article's subject obviously doesn't belong in the encyclopedia. I think just about anyone would argue that this subject can definitely be expanded, and a quick search will turn up many related articles for other countries. As for belonging here, the subject of gay rights is unarguably a large and devisive issue for many countries. Brazil is one of the largest countries in the world, and the largest of its continent, so the issue of gay rights there is most certainly a notable issue. That being said, this article definitely needs a lot of work. — NMChico24 02:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge per Zscout370. --Corporal Punishment 03:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand, part of a series, one man's trash is another man's article waiting to be expanded. Please explain "self-serving". Courtney's characterizations are disturbing, in that not only is it more than one sentence, has nothing at all about it that can be called vanity, and is well-sourced. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per NMChico24 and Zoe. This stub has clear possibility for expansion and is actually very well sourced in its own right right now. Merging it as a wait-and-see isn't the best way to approach this, as it involves shuffling content over and then shuffling it back when the (inevitable) expansion occurs, while removing valid categorisation in the meantime. Ziggurat 03:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand per above. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 04:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. The subject is article-worthy. It simply needs to be expanded by a knowledgable editor. Rohirok 04:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand. Merging this article to Human rights in Brazil would not eliminate any repetition or make Wikipedia easier to navigate. It would only mess up existing organization by removing the useful "Gay Rights in South America" navigation bar and taking the article out of the "Gay Rights by Country" category. --Celithemis 04:34, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete this stub per nom. Wryspy 04:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, all countries should have an article like this. Everyking 07:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand, I agree, this is an encyclopedia-worthy topic, and other countries probably need specific articles of this nature. -- The Anome 12:27, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand. Gay rights is different from human rights and this is a valid encyclopedia topic. --Terence Ong (Chat | Contribs) 12:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Valid stub which is part of a series. StuffOfInterest 13:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - stub is not a valid criterion for deletion, page is linked to by several other pages, has great potential for expansion, et al. WilyD 13:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong keep - obviously expandable, a topic of wide interest, seeing it belongs to Category:Gay rights by country. Historical information would be welcome, and a discussion of cultural attitudes in the various regions of Brazil also valuable, as well as what mood prevails in those municipalities where anti-gay discrimination is not banned by local statutes; but stubbiness is not a grounds for deletion. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge into Human rights in Brazil. --Gray Porpoise 14:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Given the discussion above about the detrimental effects of a merge versus just adding a stub notice to this, could you give a little explanation as to why this is preferable? Ziggurat 20:58, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and Expand into Human rights in Brazil. --Nishkid64 16:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and Expand or Merge into Human rights in Brazil. Notable subject. jgp TC 16:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge into Human rights in Brazil. --WillMak050389 16:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Just because the article is naff doesn't mean it should be deleted - it's still noteworthy. Dev920 17:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect Human rights in Brazil -- for now. It's clear the small amount of information here doesn't yet need its own page; however, the noted use of "Gay Rights in X" (where X=country) means a redirect is appropriate. Hopefully there will come a time when the content on gay rights in Brazil is much larger, and then that information could be moved back to Gay rights in Brazil. Jacqui★ 21:27, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Celithemis --Icarus (Hi!) 02:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment This may be a bad-faith nomination because an article the nominator created was nominated for deletion for, among other things, appearing to be vanity. --Icarus (Hi!) 03:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Should be easy to expand to half the size of Human rights in Brazil, numerous parallel articles exist. I do think this is a suspect bad faith nom per Icarus. --Dhartung | Talk 20:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep not the best start, but anyone is free to edit it. Carlossuarez46 06:15, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect into Human rights in Brazil --Richard 08:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep or merge into Human rights in Brazil. I do hope that this wasn't a bad faith nomination. Yamaguchi先生 08:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
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.