Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay tantra

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 of the debate was Delete. kingboyk 12:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gay tantra

Not-notable neologism, also a commercial (it is a registered trade mark of some obscure company) abakharev 01:40, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:NEO and possibly WP:SPAM, only 969 Google results [1]--☆TBC☆ (aka Tree Biting Conspiracy) 01:55, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Note that if you take the above google results out their end, you'll see they actually have 385 unique results.--Fuhghettaboutit
• Delete as advertising non-notable neologism. Ted (Talk) 03:11, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as it's not-notable. TJ Spyke 03:56, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Tantra is notable. Gay is notable. But their union isn't. And this is advert. Interlingua ^talk 04:20, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Leave/Do NOT Delete. As a legitimate synthesis of Kulacara Tantra with Western psychology and the teachings of Sri Ramakrishna in union with Gay Identity as a coherent set of spiritual teaching IS notable, as a) it is not merely “ritualized sex” (one litmus test for New Age neotantra), b) there is at least one other book not by Schindler in print on the topic, and c) the depth of spiritual and personal discipline involved is not another titillating world-tour of sexual ritual practices à la Nik Douglas & Penny Slinger. The article as originally written could be misconstrued as an advert, but I believe that was due more to the Wikipedia inexperience of the original author than merely shilling for a business. --ogam 04:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. It may exist, but as it stands now, this article fails WP:SPAM. --Coredesat 05:47, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-06-18 05:52Z
• Delete Non-notable neologism largely written as an advertisement.--Auger Martel 06:37, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Leave/Do NOT Delete. Traditional Tantra (as opposed to the sexually focused neo-Tantra most commonly encountered in the West) has always been an esoteric tradition and therefore relatively unknown except to initiates. Gay Tantra is the first attempt to expound and synthesize the essential principles and practices of the esoteric Hindu tradition with western psychotherapy and cutting-edge gay-identity theory. As such it represents a highly significant development if still relatively unknown. Gay persons have been targeted by mainstream religious institutions for condemnation and persecution for centuries on the grounds that homosexual feelings and behaviors are supposedly antithetical to spirituality, and it is not surprising that this article might encounter resistance due to its radical proposition that a well-integrated gay identity is potentially more spiritual than more polarized identities. Because the sources for information about Gay Tantra are limited, the primary way for those interested to get more information is through the resources cited. Note that Ashram West never charges for its services, so this article should not be seen as an advertisement for the ashram but rather as an information resource consistent with the purpose of any encyclopedia.—Br. William —Preceding unsigned comment added by Browilliam (talk • contribs)

Comment - All the contribs by the above user are so far limited to the article and this afd discussion. --Gurubrahma 07:45, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete And invite Br. William to contribute to the section 'Tantra in the Modern World' in the Tantra article Zero sharp 07:53, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I was almost sold on it but the ® just grates too much. Also, entry created by User:Browilliam, hence WP:AUTO. If it's notable, someone without connection to the ® part will recreate the entry. ~ trialsanderrors 07:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Exactly. I find tantra an interesting part of Hinduism, and think the intersection with gay/queer studies is also interesting. BUT the proprietary, territorial ® and the POV tone of this article mean it fails to meet Wiki standards. Interlingua ^talk 13:32, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Xyrael ^T 10:04, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• What is the sound of an article being deleted? (I know that's Zen, but close enough.) JChap 23:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Sheer nonsense. ImpuMozhi 01:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nonsense. —Khoikhoi 03:49, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, not completely unverified. And I deleted the trademark section. Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 15:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Bharatveer 06:46, 21 June 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.