Deletion of Biological determinism of human gender roles

Comment: This article isn't about "biological determinism of human gender roles" at all. This is evidenced by the first sentence which asserts that gender roles are about "human sexuality" which totally misconstrues the topic - gender roles are rather "a social role encompassing a range of behaviors and attitudes" (according to gender roles). It may be appropriate to create an article with this title should there be a section within another article actually discussing this topic and where  is satisfied. Meanwhile "gender assignment", "homosexuality", and "social construction of gender" are different topics, and if these sections are removed we'd be left with nothing. For an actual section related to this title see Gender#Biological_factors_and_views
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Splitting (WP:SIZESPLIT)

Comment: Crossroads1 has the stronger arguments, which should be taken into account with regard to what onsensus states. Anything worth keeping and that isn't redundant can be merged with one or more articles
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyrights (WP:C)

Comment: I would like to point out that our keep votes all have poor rationales; whereas I believe my rationale for deletion, endorsed above by the article's own creator, is much stronger. To reiterate: This article violates , as in its present form it is a (good faith) , and even if improved, would be a  of gender roles and sex differences in psychology. The 4 keep votes do not refute this and cite no policy that justifies a keep. The 1st keep asserts with no proof that this article is "important," whatever that means, states it has "plenty of references," which is irrelevant, and claims it is not unbalanced because it talks about the book ''Not in Our Genes'', even though I specifically mentioned this as an example of how it is unbalanced. The 2nd keep agrees it is POV, but never explains how, once renamed and fixed, it is distinct and not redundant from our other articles. The 3rd keep is frankly nigh-incomprehensible, but seems to just be saying that having POV problems does not mean we should delete it, which does not address the central problem. The 4th keep simply states that the subject is "perfectly valid," whatever that means, which again does not address the issue. Please see  and . There is nothing in the article worth saving or merging. It is an unfocused |essay that meanders through intersex conditions, homosexuality, what ''Not in Our Genes'' says about gender, a random paper by Rossiter from 1980, and intersex conditions (again!). (The first sentence does not even define the topic correctly.) The article is redundant junk
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:CFORK||WP:POVFORK||WP:REDUNDANTFORK||WP:ILIKEIT||WP:VALUABLE||WP:NOTESSAY)