The violence against men Wikipedia page has been nominated for deletion 4 times

LawUntoChaos · 2019-06-28T15:42:37+00:00

Yeah, delete it! Whilst we're at it, let's delete the violence against women page and replace them both within one page. Concentrating on all victims of violence. That's what they meant by this right?

SapioSeksualGirl · 2019-06-28T16:47:12+00:00

I am saddened so much by the constant discrimination against men. I have 3 brothers and it breaks my heart. I have no idea why society has no empathy for men. Everyone is living in a delusion if they think men have no problems.

BlueOrange22 · 2019-06-28T15:51:22+00:00

Doesn't this go against wanting to address "toxic masculinity" and "gender stereotypes"? Wouldn't refusing to recognize that men can be victims be enforcing stereotypes?

jacksleepshere · 2019-06-28T17:06:21+00:00

Nazis like to burn books.

__CarCat__ · 2019-06-28T21:21:06+00:00

A good point to keep it was made in the most recent one:

"I try to base my decisions on what minimizes harm to the encyclopedia, while maximizing benefit. In this instance, I see very little, if any, harm in letting this article remain. On the other hand, removal of the "Violence Against Men" while retaining "Violence Against Women" could be percieved (rightly or wrongly) as discriminatory and agenda-driven to an outside observer. It is not enough to act with integrity and without bias... one must also APPEAR to act with integrity. Particularly with a project which depends on outside voluntary funding, appearances matter, and there is alredy plenty of fodder for the "Wikipedia is biased" crowd, in the media and elsewhere, without dishing more up to them on a silver platter... that this AfD was initiated by the creator of Wikiproject Feminism would be icing on the cake we'd be serving up to some critics of the encyclopedia. In sum, the potential downsides in this instance (potential damage to the reputation of the encylopedia), outweigh the minmial upsides and benefit of removing a perhaps borderline article. Marteau (talk)"

Finally someone at least slightly reasonable.

RagingAlien · 2019-06-28T20:07:29+00:00

14 September 2006:

The article was created by a copy-paste of Violence against women with the word "women" in the original changed to "men". Problem is that "violence against women" is a term [...] with specific [...] use within at least some segments of the world, a fact reflected in everything from legislation like the Violence Against Women Act to book titles to people and groups who identify themselves as part of a "movement to end violence against women", all of which suggest that there is a cohesive idea. "Violence against men," as a topic name for a cohesive idea, has no such evidence for its existence; given the articles on which links to Violence against men have been added, the manner in which those links were added, and the way in which the article was created, it looks like a WP:POINT violation in the form of a neologism and original research.

Most comments are talking about it being just a collection of links with no actual content behind it, and actually talk about possibly deleting the Women version as well for the same issues.

15 Oct 2011:

I see from the previous nomination that the consensus was to delete, but somehow it was redirected to domestic violence instead. That redirect is inappropriate. [...] I do think there could be a valid article written with this title, but it does not exist currently and the article should be honestly deleted rather than shoving those who search for it off onto a dubiously related article.

Basically, the original result was to delete but rather than getting deleted it just got redirected and people were wondering if it should be properly removed.

8 March 2013:

I'm on the fence about this one. I could conceive of sufficient improvement to this article such that it would be worth keeping, but [...] very little to none of the current content would belong in a quality treatment of the subject. As it stands, the article is a big, messy bit of synthesis. [...] The summary of domestic abuse is probably the only thing that really belongs here. Is that enough? I'm not sure. What do you think?

Basically a discussion as the article was apparently very poor at the time. Fair bit of mentions to the fact that domestic violence against men was already a topic within the "domestic violence" article, same as it was for women apparently.

24 February 2015:

No quote here, as the discussion here is much more long-winded, but it follows similar lines to the previous ones. However, it seems the article was already better fleshed out at this time and more actual material was listed, rather than being a conglomerate of sources. As there was "no consensus", the article in question remained.

TL;DR:

Article was a badly written article for a majority of those complaints, or was already covered within other pages. Only after 2015 does the article apparently have enough material for people to be able to properly defend it and as such was kept intact. This post is basically complaining that some wikipedia users were against maintaining poorly-written articles.

romulusnr · 2019-06-28T19:45:05+00:00

Deletionism is so rampant at WP it's a minor miracle that there's anything left on the site. "I've never heard of it, so delete." "I think it is controversial, so delete." "I don't think it's written well, so delete." "It's old, so delete."

ralphswanson · 2019-06-28T20:18:03+00:00

Feminism is the religion of Wikipedia. Just look at their page for 'Feminism'. It does not even mention that feminism is a controversial movement rejected by the majority of women.

romulusnr · 2019-06-28T19:50:59+00:00

TBF FWIW one of those deletions was to change the title to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men which is still there and has not been proposed for deletion (yet).

TurboSchnauzer · 2019-06-28T20:43:33+00:00

I don't know much about the inner workings of Wikipedia, but I'm surprised it's only 4.

Smacers · 2019-06-29T01:04:10+00:00

Pin this as a /r/MensRights community project. This Wikipedia page can have benefits magnitudes more than even the great work happening here.

Let them keep deleting it too - each time is an attestation to their double standard hypocracy and misandry.

AngryTails · 2019-06-29T00:57:41+00:00

Honestly, yall should look at the MGTOW wiki. Half of that entire page is sourced by 1 article that is supposedly an informative but reads like a opinion.

chinawinsworlds · 2019-06-28T22:07:11+00:00

Hundreds of millions, probably billions of men have been killed in wars throughout our history. That doesn't deserve a violence against men page?

Akesgeroth · 2019-06-28T19:11:25+00:00

Welcome to why Wikipedia is not accepted as a source by any serious academic.

slixx_06 · 2019-06-28T21:12:59+00:00

I'm glad I never gave money to that site.

ohpee8 · 2019-06-29T03:25:15+00:00

this is why i'll never donate to wikipedia

1LegendaryWombat · 2019-06-29T07:59:32+00:00

Only four times? Not bad, and its still there.

SuperSloBro · 2019-07-06T05:54:30+00:00

Wait so it isn't deleted because its considered a vital page by society?? If that means that people think it was vital, good on the people who made it a vital page. (As you can tell i have no idea how this works)

A_one_legged_man · 2019-06-28T22:49:05+00:00

Wikipedia is heavily biased toward leftism and cultural marxism.

Galv4tr0n · 2019-06-29T10:27:31+00:00

Kikepedia is run by kike whores so i'm not surprised.

Title	The violence against men Wikipedia page has been nominated for deletion 4 times
Author	Samuel71900
Upvotes	1249
Comments	65
Date	June 28, 2019 2:30 PM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/c6kv63/the_violence_against_men_wikipedia_page_has_been/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/the-violence-against-men-wikipedia-page-has-been.874573 https://theredarchive.com/post/874573

Comments

TL;DR: