Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Straight pride (3rd nomination)
Some respondents here have hinted or stated that this article has been difficult to keep neutral in the past.  However, after reading it from start to finish just now, it seems reasonably neutral now.  I agree with those who think this article covers a real notable topic.  I think it would be a mistake to try to shoehorn this material into another article, or other articles.  No, I don't see this as a ''"real"'' movement.  I don't see any sign that anyone here, or anyone in the real world, seriously thinks it is a real movement.  Rather, it seems more like real world individuals trying to do the real world equivalent of .  So it is a kind of hoax.  But  says we shouldn't have articles ''that are hoaxes''.  It doesn't say we shouldn't have ''that are about hoaxes'' -- certainly not when there are sufficient  that cover those hoaxes.  As to the suggestions that this article be merged.  First, since this is a real topic, one individuals might want to put on their watchlist, merging to any one of the merge targets suggested here erodes the value of watchlists.  All those possible merge targets are related.  But I might be interested in being advised throught my watchlist of changes to Straight Pride, and not interested in being advised of changes to our coverage of LGBT rights opposition, or Gay Pride, or LGBT rights, or School speech (First Amendment), or homophobia, or Traditional marriage movement.  Second, it has always struck me, in any discussion where several people suggest merging the article, but they can't agree on which potential target article is the logical article to merge to, that merging to any of them is a bad idea.  When the closing administrator picks one of the target articles they have to be doing a disservice to all the other possible merge targets.  In these cases it is far better for each of the possible merge target to have a sentence or a brief paragraph of context, followed by a {{tl|see also}} or {{tl|main article}} that links to Straight Pride, and to keep the main details of our coverage of this topic right where it is now.  Please don't forget |the wikipedia is not paper.  It is easier for our readers, at those other articles, to click on the link to Straight Pride if they want to read about Straight Pride, and to not click on the link if they want to ignore this topic than it is to puff up that related article with multiple topics.  I know some contributors would be perfectly happy having all the other places that currently link to Straight Pride instead redirect to a subsection heading like LGBT rights opposition#Straight Pride.  But, in doing so, they are overlooking series technical issues.  The bidirectional wikilinks we use here are far superior to the unidirectional links used on the world-wide-web -- but only when used properly
— NONE, NONE
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:POINT||WP:HOAX||WP:RS||WP:NOTPAPER (Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point)