Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interracial fetish

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus; keep. Johnleemk | Talk 12:55, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Term doesn't seem to exist outside porn ads. NicM 20:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

• Strong keep - dumbest AFD I've seen in a long while. Cyde Weys _vote^talk 20:55, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • [1], [2], [3]. Its real? NicM 20:59, 11 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]
    • Seems obvious to me ... there's a huge market for interracial porn out there and that would make these people interracial fetishists. let me amend my original statement; I was over-reacting. It's not the dumbest AFD I've seen in awhile, as apparently it has more worth than I first thought. --Cyde Weys _vote^talk 21:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • No problem, my reason was perhaps expressed a little dumbly :-). You may be right that the term is real, but I can't find much evidence it really is, or is what the article says. I'd be happy to keep if I saw a rewrite as "a fetish possessed by (some) people who like interracial porn," preferably with sources, if there are any. NicM 22:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete, but I could change that to a keep if the article is completely rewritten. I am sure something could be written on something reminiscent of this topic, but this article is nowhere close to being encyclopedic. u p p l a n d 21:45, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Sexual fetishism is very real and important, but does anyone call it interracial fetishism? calling it interracial fetishism almost assumes the reader can't be asian or black. So since this article needs completely different content and a different name, it basically needs to be deleted and is somewhat similar to an article that is important and probably already exists Lotusduck 00:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Ethnic stereotypes in pornography exists and addresses every issue that this article should and doesn't. This amounts to a neologism and listcruft and something that if completed to a high standard would be an exact copy of ethnic stereotypes in pornography- note that the interracial fetish article focuses on pornography. Lotusduck 00:29, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unless totally rewritten and we get WP:CITE from Wikipedia:Reliable sources. - brenneman^(t)(c) 02:06, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, but rename. Suggest Interracial sexual preference. This is a real phenomenom, but not a "fetish" inasmuch as fetish a proclivity for conduct or circumstances that the majority would not find stimulating. Given the right circumstances, most anyone could be turned on by a person of a different race. And there are some folks who are known to prefer a specific race (not their own) for sexual congress. There's a few studies, like here, that have been done, but scientific research is generally bogged down due to the politically explosive nature of the situation. Jtmichcock 04:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep possibly merge with Interracial pornography or Ethnic stereotypes in pornography. I haven't looked very hard, but did find one scholarly source that talks about epidermal fetishism and the eroticization of non-white peoples [4]. There are probably many more that look at this from the white-black or white-Asian angles. -- JJay 05:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep no need to merge. --Pboyd04 05:38, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment -- I'd vote on this, if I were convinced that the phrase is in general and widespread usage by people outside the fetishist communuity. Otherwise it's cruft. -- SockpuppetSamuelson 09:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase "interracial fetish" is new to me in terms of the an explanation. "Prefers dating members of X race" or "Likes to watch pornography where a member of X race has sex with a member of Y race" are common expressions. Fetish implies a peculiar motif that isn't present here such a with latex or bondage practices. Nonetheless, there exists the above-mentioned proclivity and the reason it's hard to find any mentions "in general use" is because few wish to talk about it such as(here. Jtmichcock 20:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Plea if you read this article I think you will be hard pressed to find a single worthy thing in it. Once again, it is not about interracial anything, it is about ethnic prefferences in pornography, not about pornography with different races participating in it. The title suggests some worthy topic, but the content is a list of ethnicities with unverified statements as to who likes them best. I tend to be a little demanding of inclusioners, so I apologize- I just want to know, what info in the text of this article is verifiable and important? Lotusduck 20:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a list of ethnicities with an unverifiable popularity rating next to each. From the article: * Native American Girls (Younger Native American Females) - very popular amongst caucasian American men African Americans are the most popular interracial fetish, apparently, and while these topics could be expanded into something completely different and verifiable, it's important to recognize that they already have been, in interracial pornography and ethnic stereotypes in pornography. What could be created under a different name is another issue- is there actually text in this article that is worth keeping? Lotusduck 20:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I think this topic may warrant an encyclopedic article. But this article is worthless. Edgar181 11:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep VfD is ot cleanup.  Grue  14:04, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.