From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 was delete. Uncontested, a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources means the subject does not meet WP:GNG. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 04:48, 17 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Sexitude

Sexitude (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The references amount only to press releases--or straightforward advertisements . No sign of any actual reliable coverage. DGG ( talk ) 20:54, 9 June 2016 (UTC) reply

  • Delete as it's still only 5 years old and localized so any available coverage is going to be imaginably local, nothing else convincing to suggest independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 21:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 21:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC) reply
  • Delete did a Google search to find only sources related to the subject. There does not seem to be a lot of national exposure, or local sources even. -- LuK3 (Talk) 22:05, 9 June 2016 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 13:50, 13 June 2016 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 13:50, 13 June 2016 (UTC) reply
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.