Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chickenhawk (sexuality)
I see no strong reason to delete it. If it's unsourced, it needs sources, if it doesn't seem it can get bigger -- that could very well be because you aren't interested in the topic. Furthermore, I also noticed that you previously tried to delete Gay_%28disambiguation%29 and Lesbian_%28disambiguation%29, leading me to wonder if the reason you didn't cite a policy reason for deletion is because the real reason of this nomination is to raise a |soapbox issue
— User:Spazure, 08:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:SOAP (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)