Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Retro housewife
I do agree that there is a basic concept here which might be encyclopedic. However, neither this article title nor its contents are likely to form the basis of useful material for that article. With respect to the article title,  states ''In a few cases, there will be notable topics which are well-documented in reliable sources, but for which no accepted short-hand term exists. It can be tempting to employ a made-up or non-notable neologism in such a case. Instead, use a title that is a descriptive phrase in plain English, even if this makes for a somewhat long or awkward title.''  So, at minimum, the title needs to go.  However, the article content is just as problematic, describing a point-of-view on feminism without providing it's context within the various points of view on feminism.  Much of the article seems, perhaps only because of the lack of sources for many of the statements and the POV-pushing, to be potentially in violation of .  In short, I looked for something to salvage that I could argue needed to be merged into an article like housewife or feminism or post-feminism, but failed to find sourced, non-POV content to salvage. (If you can find content you believe is worth salvaging, I recommend merge as the appropriate alternative
— User:Joe, 16:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NEO||WP:NOR (Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary)