Talk:Sexual stereotyping

message: Hello,
I am pleased to present to you all this article on sexual stereotyping!  Hopefully this will contribute to worldwide sexual tolerance education.  I have added various aspects from the world of logic, but I believe this article could use analysis from psychology.  Also, please check the categories for this page. --Wykypydya 00:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled comment 

message: To User:Jerry lavoie, the nominator of this article for Speedy Deletion:
So, it seems that this article is subject to the repressive hostility of intolerant Wikipedians.  This article has an entirely notable and meritable purpose, as it documents a very sensitive and substantive issue in society very related to other Wikipedia articles (i.e. homophobia, gay rights, prejudice).  I can see why you suggest this article to be merged with Stereotype as this topic is a subset of that topic.  But why, after I just put all this effort into writing about this topic in the most objective and non-POV way, and even multiply acknowledged the shortcoming and need for sources and references, do you take this extreme and irrational step of demanding this article simply be deleted, and make the accusation that this article is POV?  If you feel it should be merged, why don't you USE THAT TEMPLATE INSTEAD??  I've nothing against it.  If you feel that some parts are POV, then why don't you USE THAT TEMPLATE as well?  I'm sure the Wikipedia community will be glad to pitch in, collaborate, and perhaps fix the POV issues, as happens on many WP articles.  But to go so far, so impulsively, nominating this piece for deletion?  That's uncalled for.  I am progressively seeing where the people are coming from who say that you can hardly write anything new on Wikipedia anymore without it getting censured and blacklisted.  I can confidently say that I wrote this article as objectively as I could, and focused on the facts rather than the opinions.  Perhaps YOU are the subjective/biased one, going around and discrediting legitimate articles, possibly because you have a dissenting viewpoint.  Let's some opinions on this, including positive alternatives to deletion. --Wykypydya 00:44, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the speedy.  This article appears to be comprised of nothing but original research and really either needs to be cleaned up, deleted, or merged into homophobia.  However, none of those problems are criteria for speedy deletion. --BigDT 03:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!  I acknowledge that the article may have such problems; could these templates please be added?  --Wykypydya 03:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speedy deletion -- (Resolved) 

message: Thanks to the bot User:SatyrBot for categorizing this talk page as "WikiProject LGBT studies" "stub-class"!  --Wykypydya 01:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acknowledgement to SatyrBot 

message: There has been some concern expressed that the article's title may be a misnomer or that the article does not fulfill its intended purpose or answer its title.  Perhaps an expert on the topic would be helpful to verify this article?
I would also like to mention that, although not everything you learn in school is always textbook-correct, in my health class we received some ditto or maybe saw an overhead transparency about "sexual stereotyping", which described "sexual stereotyping" as something along the lines of ascribing a sexual orientation to someone based on behavior or dress.  That is where I got the idea for the title.  The ditto/transparency may have been designed by the teacher, or it may have been part of a textbook-teacher series. --Wykypydya 17:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speedy Deletion (2nd) (resolved)