Talk:Pomosexual

This article was nominated for deletion on 13 April 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Archives

Split article?, Pomosexual & undefined sexual orientation

Should this article be spilt in two?, with a Pomosexual article and Undefined sexual orientation article.--cooljuno411 07:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, I think these two topics are similar, but in need of different articles. I also thing that Undefined sexual orientation should be the "main article", and pomosexual as the more "minor article", if you understand what i am saying. I believe they are two completely separate topics, and should separated. --cooljuno411 07:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do the nature that this article gets very little attention, i have gone ahead and made the split. If anyone find an issue with this, i will be happy to hear continued discussion.--cooljuno411 04:03, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see the distinction. Can you cite a source that supports this split? Steve Carlson^Talk 07:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One is a "label" (pomosexual), and one is the actual theory itself. Watch The Real World: Brooklyn? Sarah said she doesn't feel as though she has to label her sexual orientation, she never said "i'm pomosexual".... The fact that one is a "label of the theory" and on is the "theory" makes the separate. What makes them also very distinct is that pomosexual is an explicit shun of sexual orientation labels. Undefined sexual orientation means you do not have a sexual orientation label. In other cultures, they do not use Western Labels, and do not have sexual orientation labels.... so they clearly wouldn't be pomosexual. --cooljuno411 23:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Criticism" section

I was bold and restored the "Criticism" section (see previous discussion). I agree that it should be interwoven with the article and the first sentence should be reworded, but I don't think just deleting sourced content is a good way to develop an article. --AdamSommerton (talk) 23:21, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

هذا جيد 2C0F:FC89:801C:3516:9D26:30F8:3FB8:B392 (talk) 02:21, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Name

I don't have experience with (wikipedia) page moves, but I think the name might be better worded as "Pomosexuality" rather than "Pomosexual". tinlv7 [Please copy a response here] 09:32, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article transwikid to wiktionary

So far this article is just a dictionary definition, talking about the word pomosexual. It has been transwikid to wiktionary, and had the template for cleanup on it for a long time. I completed the cleanup by making it a soft redirect to wiktionary.

If there is a closely related wikipedia article that this should be a redirect to, please feel free to redirect it. (I would have used sexual privacy, but that doesn't exist at this time.)

If you think there is a topic here and the article here should be restored, the first thing would be to demonstrate that there is an underlying concept here, indicate how it is distinct from other related topics, such as closeted. (i.e. talk about the topic and not the word.) Or, perhaps look at incorporating this into a more general article about sexual identity slang, or sexual privacy. Zodon (talk) 20:55, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]