Talk:sexual minority

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

sexual minority

Sure not just sexual + minority? -- Liliana • 09:36, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Delete, unless I'm missing something. Check that sexual covers sexual preferences. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:41, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes it does, #4. Fugyoo 10:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Because I just added it; sexual could do with a bit of work, mind you. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:08, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Keep this is not anything that is simply sexual, it most often means gays and sometimes prostitutes, how could that be inferred by looking up those two words separately, that is not likely so it is no SOP.Acdcrocks 19:13, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

My gut feeling is delete but I'm also aware that this could theoretically mean "minority" in age terms, e.g. the kind of age minority that is not yet old enough to have legal sex. Equinox ◑ 19:49, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Move to RfV. It is completely uncited. It is apparently taken from the eponymous unreferenced WP page or else it is authored by the same author or hisher fellow travelers. DCDuring TALK 20:46, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Moving (immediately) to rfv would bypass the issue of admissibility. Do we want to do that? If so and it passes I think it'd just get nominated again for rfd. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:44, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Existence is not the sole point of citations. I doubt that any honest effort to cite the term would fail to show a range of meanings beyond the narrow one given. The meaning given is a narrow one that reflects some author's intent, ie, what heshe means by the term in a given work or what the words can each be assumed to mean in context. I suppose that we cannot assume that those who would undertake the effort would necessarily be open to those possibilities. DCDuring TALK 14:10, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Avoid moving to RfV: There is no doubt the term is actually used, per google books:"sexual minority" and google scholar:"sexual minority". As a point of possible interest, a number of these Google books finds seem to be from academic writing. I abstain from saying whether this should be kept or deleted. One quotation from Google scholar, for illustration: School support groups, other school factors, and the safety of sexual minority adolescents, C Goodenow, L Szalacha, 2006: "Sexual minority adolescents—those self-identifying as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) or with same-sex desires or sexual experiences—report higher rates of victimization and suicidality than their heterosexual peers, [...]". --Dan Polansky 08:57, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

nothing in minority would imply that this term is usually attributed to gays, nothing in sexual would easily identify that this is sexual orientation, sexual minority means LGBT for all practical purposes and that is clearly idiomatic

71.142.73.25 22:52, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Week keep as defined. If it includes paedophilia, incest and other minorities, then delete. —Internoob 23:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

About that, again: [1], [2] and [3] all say that some non-LGBT people are sexual minorities. —Internoob 23:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

That extension is rare however.Lucifer 02:18, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Keep. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 04:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Kept.​—msh210℠ (talk) 22:13, 29 January 2012 (UTC)