The result was merge to Prostitution and the law. T. Canens (talk) 23:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:((subst:spa|username)) ; suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)) ; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)) . |
Basically an essay, not sure what this contributes that's not already presented at Prostitution and the law. If there is anything here that's salvageable it could be merged there. TJ Black (talk) 06:33, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
*Merge (and later restore if appropriate).Weak keep and rescue (per my comment below) This is a clear essay which nonetheless has substantial value. For now, the most appropriate target is Feminist views on prostitution and secondarily (mainly "the Nordic model" material) prostitution and the law. Note that feminist activism (as opposed to just views) in support of sex workers gets space at Sex workers' rights. It's entirely legitimate to create say Feminist activism against prostitution, which is probably a more accurate description of the wide range of activism, legal moves, and philosophies described here. However, I doubt the essay concerns would be addressed by just moving the article.--Carwil (talk) 18:18, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]