Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Penis removal

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 Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:35, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Penis removal

This is an unencyclopedic topic. It doesn't belong in an encyclopedia, probably belongs more likely in a history or medical journal. Charles and Co. 05:40, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep. Topic is encyclopedic and notable by Wikipedia standards. — Phil Welch 06:20, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Article coveres notable and diverse topic well. More than sufficient amount of content and depth to warrant a stand-alone article. Note that this one has been developing for over a year.Tobycat 06:39, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there doesn't seem to be a VfD notice on the article page.Tobycat 06:39, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Then put up a notice, it's a Wiki after all! Fixed :) — Phil Welch 04:58, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable. Xoloz 06:55, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, maybe delist since the Vfd tag hasn't been added. Kappa 08:34, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, no, it does belong--Sophitus 10:19, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
Keep, no reason given why this shouldn't belong here. Mgm|^(talk) 10:43, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Good little article. Capitalistroadster 10:59, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Anybody else read that Poul Anderson story, "The Pugilist"?
Keep, notability. Megan1967 04:10, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep ...nervously keeping legs crossed. — RJH 05:32, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable, informative - Pete C ^✍ 08:52, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Why should that topic be unencyclopedic? -- AlexR
Strong Keep There are many other medical listings in this encyclopedia. What makes this one different? -- alofferman 14:22, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per what everyone else said -CunningLinguist 23:39, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for above reasons. A squeamish but completely valid topic. neckro 03:30, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Just kidding. Definitely keep. 70.177.90.39 05:29, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- *Smacks you.* :-D alofferman 10:59, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is only 'unencyclopedic' if we take a narrow definition of what an encyclopedia is. It has valuable and interesting information. Robertbrockway 21:51 4 June, 2005 (UTC)

Strong keep --67.161.115.23 21:53, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Keep--Mr Tan 14:13, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Keep--EASports 22:28, 10 Jun 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.