Deletion of Female privilege

Comment: with a new article that has proper citations that describe the subject, the citations are independent and reliable, and the article is written in a neutral point of view that doesn't contain .  The subject is notable but the currently article does a poor and unsalvageable job of describing it.--v/r
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: There has not been an effort from those attempting to have the article deleted to improve the article or discuss the article on the talk page. As it stands, the article has potential and already is seeing more evidence and citation than most articles in this stage. The article is being treated with haste and recklessness and there is no reason for deletion as per -REASON|Wikipedia's deletion policy. Special:Contributions/24.93.169.212|24.93.169.212
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DEL)

Comment: What a hot mess. If someone could improve this, I could favor keeping it.  For now, it |might need to be started from scratch
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: Not a significant enough topic to merit its own article without quickly becoming |original synthesis (or outright ranting). Possibly '''redirect''' to men's rights or Male privilege#Against the notion of 'male privilege
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: inconsistent with the rules regarding |synthesis and |original research
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH||WP:NOR)

Comment: essentially |Articles for Deletion discussion debate pages are not for cleanup purposes. This topic is notable. It's received coverage in literally '''''https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Female+privilege%22&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1 thousands of different books.''''' &mdash
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP)