| Revision as of 07:59, 9 November 2014 editRoscelese (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers35,788 edits sk← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:36, 9 November 2014 edit undoDjcheburashka (talk | contribs)431 edits Undid revision 633064292 by Roscelese (talk) No. Rosc is on a campaign here... The page meets all deletion criteria, and has been warned for years.Next edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| ] (]) 07:29, 9 November 2014 (UTC) | ] (]) 07:29, 9 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Speedy keep''' as bad faith nomination. User obviously hasn't bothered to read the page or look for sources before nominating it for deletion, since the page lists several sources and there's copious discussion in the literature of this idea. –] (] ⋅ ]) 07:59, 9 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 08:36, 9 November 2014
This is one of a set of related pages about women's issues and criminology all created by a single editor that have a few things in common:
# A total lack of sources. As of this writing, the page has exactly 0 citations to sources. # A total lack of evidence of notability. # A total lack of evidence that the subject matter even exists independent of the wikipedia article. # Requests for improvement that are several *years* old, in this case three. # A connection to the topic of the editor's proposed PhD thesis.
These pages have been up for long enough. If they're not improved in seven days, per the policy, time to take them down.