Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay skinheads

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. (Keep 12 - Delete 9 - Merge and redirect 6) -- AllyUnion (talk) 04:42, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Gay skinheads

Does it make any sense to have this article? If there's nothing especially noteworthy about gay skinheads as a group, we might as well have articles about, oh, I dunno, gay bakers or gay taxi drivers -- Ferkelparade π 10:09, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Agree completely. Delete. Mgm|^(talk) 11:34, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. jni 13:22, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
On the one hand, it is important to raise awareness of the fact that not everyone who looks like a skinhead is a violent neo-Nazi, a point that is raised at Skinhead. There is indeed a subculture of gay men who from their outward appearance are indistinguishable from Nazi skinheads, but they do not practice or condone violence and hatred (except perhaps, like members of SHARP and ARA, against Nazi/racist skins). They just like the tough-boy look and the attitude. On the other hand, the article as it currently stands does not establish their significance, and is not NPOV ("abusing the skinhead subculture", indeed!). I vote merge and redirect to Skinhead in the hopes that someone will write a paragraph there on the significance of the gay skinhead subsubculture. --Angr 13:34, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Merge to skinhead wouldn't hurt. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:51, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
It's a legitimate member of Template:Skinhead. Keep it; cleanup or expand as necessary. Gay skinhead, singular, might be a more Wikistyle title. Samaritan 15:11, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
~~Delete~~. Merge and Redirect to Skinhead. Apart from the POV, the article just says that they are skinheads who just happen to be gay. Are Bisexual skinheads, Tall skinheads and Skinheads who like the color blue all legitimate members of Template:Skinhead?
I think the reason why this phenomenon gets attention is because it's curious, sort of like the existence of Log Cabin Republicans -- why would a group of gay people want to be anything like Nazis, who persecuted gay people in concentration camps? For this reason I think it's useful to keep some sort of reference to them on Wikipedia. I'm not sure that this article as it stands now is compelling enough to keep, but I would support merging with the main article on Skinheads. Katefan0 16:46, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
Delete I don't see notability, and there's always the possibilty this is a subtle attack article. --InShaneee 18:50, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- It's a valid subculture. I speak from personal knowledge, but a Google search will bear that out. Katefan0 21:03, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
keep or merge but needs NPOV work. I think gay skinheads are a significant subculture, unlike gay taxi drivers. Kappa 19:10, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Delete, not a peer-reviewed sociological classification, for starters. Wyss 19:36, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Are you so sure? It's enough of a phenomenon to draw authorship on the subject, such as Gay Skins: Class, Masculinity and Queer Appropriation, a sociological history of the subculture since the late 1960's. Katefan0 21:03, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm, I've heard it called rough trade but whatever. Should have said insufficient peer review then. IMHO this is not a helpful (or even meaningful) classification. Wyss 21:14, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Delete What's next? Articles on gay punkers, gay rockers, gay postmen? JimmyShelter 20:53, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Notable and encyclopedic subculture subset. Needs to be renamed in the signular however.--Centauri 21:49, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Useless stub, non-encyclopedic. Gamaliel 22:17, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Notable phenomenon, bad article. Cleanup, but keep. Bearcat 23:56, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep and cleanup. Real subculture of both the gay and skinhead cultures. Rick K 00:23, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
Keep, cleanup and expand. Significant and notable queer culture. Megan1967 01:00, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep, they are not unrelated concepts - gay skinheads are a distinct and identifiable subculture, certainly encyclopaedic AND definately notable. --Oldak Quill 02:27, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Do they get along with GNAA? Rhobite 18:26, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC) p.s. oops, forgot to sign. thanks katefan0.

Above by Rhobite. Katefan0 15:39, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Delete. At most, it merits a mention in the Skinheads article that some skinheads are gays who have adopted the skinhead style and sometimes congregate with straight skinheads, but who don't necessarily share all their views and behaviours. If such a mention is made, it should be sourced and quantified (unlike this article). From the current article, I have no reason to believe that someone didn't just make this up, or if they didn't, that it is more than a few people. --BM 16:44, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Delete --BenWilson 17:16, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
Keep it. —RaD Man (talk) 21:42, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The article, in its current form, is nothing short of awful. The subject, however, is significant as a subculture. Keep, but improve. CJCurrie 02:02, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep, concur with CJCurrie. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:05, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)
Merge and redirect to skinhead. --Slowking Man 08:08, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)
Merge and redirect to skinhead -- as disturbing as it may be to non-skinheads, glbts, and perhaps even to skinheads. sigh HyperZonk 06:08, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)
Keep Spinboy 23:08, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Guan aco 01:53, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
delete this bullshit! gayskins are NOT Skin! Haha, I've even read articles by gayskins claiming that nazi's hijact the movement. If someone did, it would be those gay creeps!SkaHead 16:52, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- This vote was above user's first edit. Katefan0 17:04, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
Comment: "Gayskin" gets 31,800 google hits. [1], more than "gay skinhead" (19,300) . Kappa 17:20, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.