Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Same-sex unions in flux - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

168:.) The article makes clear that it is asserting that this is a term, not just a concept: "Same-sex marriage (or "same-sex unions) in flux" is a term that describes a form of same-sex union"; "The term "in flux" helps other users and readers diaffentirerate between a country or region that has already ruled in favor of legalizing such unions." Also, the article is unsourced and only ever cited to another Knowledge (XXG) article. We already have both 265:
until sources are cited. Even giving the benefit of the doubt that this isn't a neologism, I'm having trouble understanding the fine points of what the article is trying to say--fine distinctions between "in flux" and "future legislation," what "accomodating" means, whether we're talking about just
287:) I'd be fine with userfication if the contributor requests. Otherwise, I'm afraid it might just delay the clean-up for later. I also need to note that, until this term is taken up by a community, I'm afraid that it may always be a 157: 152: 151:
doesn't suggest it is a widespread term, with (currently) 6 cumulative hits--two of which are to Knowledge (XXG) and none of which are reliable sources. There are 0 hits for the term at google books (
189:- Arguably speedy as an attempt to communicate, since the promotion of the term is aimed at reader and users - implicitly, those of Knowledge (XXG) itself. In any case, this is a useless neologism. 148: 132: 160: 99: 94: 103: 154: 327: 300: 86: 166: 163: 62: 17: 266:
same-sex marriage or other legal unions, etc. As an editor, I need reliable sources before I can improve the article for clarity.
234: 144: 366: 346: 288: 275: 257: 241: 215: 198: 180: 68: 36: 292: 250: 335: 304: 271: 90: 299:
article, the only information here that does not relate to the neologism is "The most notable examples would be
365:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
57: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
82: 74: 211: 326:
at the latest." I don't know much about the topic, but this unsourced statement doesn't seem to mesh with
194: 140: 267: 173: 231: 343: 177: 52: 49: 319: 206:, original research and/or attempt to coin a new term. Exactly what Knowledge (XXG)'s not about. 190: 169: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
224: 338:, where it is sourced. If it needs to be merged, it might be better to merge it from 254: 120: 207: 295:, now that I've read that one. :) With respect to merging material into 312: 316: 342:
article, which is otherwise likely to remain on Knowledge (XXG). --
308: 359:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
323: 127: 116: 112: 108: 39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 369:). No further edits should be made to this page. 249:all content not regarding the neologism into 8: 328:Recognition of same-sex unions in Ecuador 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 24: 311:is not seemingly stalled as in 176:. This was a challenged PROD. 1: 253:, if it's not already there. 293:Status of same-sex marriage 251:Status of same-sex marriage 386: 336:Same-sex marriage in Nepal 330:. The 2010 date for Nepal 307:, though the situation in 69:01:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC) 347:11:35, 8 April 2009 (UTC) 276:05:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC) 258:03:05, 8 April 2009 (UTC) 242:17:55, 7 April 2009 (UTC) 216:14:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC) 199:13:46, 7 April 2009 (UTC) 181:10:58, 7 April 2009 (UTC) 145:Same-sex marriage in flux 362:Please do not modify it. 162:) and 0 at google news ( 156:), 0 at google scholar ( 32:Please do not modify it. 149:Same-sex unions in flux 83:Same-sex unions in flux 75:Same-sex unions in flux 174:Same-sex relationship 143:. A google search of 322:should be legal by 139:This seems to be a 320:same-sex marriages 44:The result was 286: 170:Same-sex marriage 377: 364: 285:To the last two. 284: 268:Matt Fitzpatrick 239: 229: 223:this neologism.— 130: 124: 106: 65: 60: 55: 34: 385: 384: 380: 379: 378: 376: 375: 374: 373: 367:deletion review 360: 238: 235: 225: 126: 97: 81: 78: 63: 58: 53: 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 383: 381: 372: 371: 354: 352: 351: 350: 349: 344:Moonriddengirl 260: 244: 236: 218: 201: 178:Moonriddengirl 137: 136: 77: 72: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 382: 370: 368: 363: 357: 356: 355: 348: 345: 341: 337: 333: 329: 325: 321: 318: 314: 310: 306: 302: 298: 294: 290: 282: 279: 278: 277: 273: 269: 264: 261: 259: 256: 252: 248: 245: 243: 240: 232: 230: 228: 222: 219: 217: 213: 209: 205: 202: 200: 196: 192: 188: 185: 184: 183: 182: 179: 175: 171: 167: 164: 161: 158: 155: 153: 150: 146: 142: 134: 129: 122: 118: 114: 110: 105: 101: 96: 92: 88: 84: 80: 79: 76: 73: 71: 70: 66: 61: 56: 51: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 361: 358: 353: 339: 331: 315:, therefore 296: 280: 262: 246: 226: 220: 203: 191:AlexTiefling 186: 138: 45: 43: 31: 28: 334:covered by 227:S Marshall 141:neologism 255:Dcoetzee 133:View log 313:Ecuador 301:Ecuador 281:Comment 147:and of 100:protect 95:history 50:King of 317:Nepali 263:Userfy 221:Delete 208:Stifle 204:Delete 187:Delete 128:delete 104:delete 46:delete 309:Nepal 305:Nepal 247:Merge 131:) – ( 121:views 113:watch 109:links 16:< 340:that 324:2010 303:and 297:that 289:fork 272:talk 237:Cont 212:talk 195:talk 172:and 117:logs 91:talk 87:edit 291:of 332:is 274:) 214:) 197:) 165:, 159:, 119:| 115:| 111:| 107:| 102:| 98:| 93:| 89:| 67:♠ 48:. 283:( 270:( 233:/ 210:( 193:( 135:) 125:( 123:) 85:( 64:♣ 59:♦ 54:♥

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
deletion review
King of



01:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Same-sex unions in flux
Same-sex unions in flux
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
delete
View log
neologism
Same-sex marriage in flux
Same-sex unions in flux






Same-sex marriage

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.