Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ass to pussy


 * 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 was delete truly WP:NEO, WP:V, possible WP:NOR. Dakota 05:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Ass to pussy

 * — (View AfD)

This page violates WP:NEO, WP:V and probably WP:NOR. Moreover, it has been tagged as having not cited its sources for one year and is still not sourced. CyberAnth 01:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC) Speedy DeleteThere is no reference and quesitonable purpose. Hoax? Perhaps there could be a mention of techniques at a site on pornographic performance techniques, or transfer to such a site. I think I'll go wash up now. (the preceding unsigned comment was added by at 21:59, 26 December 2006 by User:Bwithh .the preceding unsigned comment was added by at 21:59, 26 December 2006 by User:Kevin Murray
 * Comment there also seems to be an Ass to mouth article. ← A NAS  Talk? 01:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The above comment was NOT added by me. It was added by User:Kevin Murray. I'm sure this was just a mixup. I have no opinion on this afd discussion at this time. Bwithh 03:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, cannot find evidence to support this name for an admittedly common feature of porn. Malla  nox  03:01, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pretty obviously a take off on ass to mouth, but while that one is not a neologism, this one is.  —bbatsell  ¿?  03:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect and merge to Ass to mouth. Or rename to "double dipping (porn)" or something. The article describes a fairly common practice in porn, so it deserves mention somewhere but perhaps not in its own article. =Axlq 03:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete or Move That's not what I call an encylopedia title, call it.... Anal Vaginal Contact or something. T. Kewl the First 03:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If kept, RENAME to Anal-vaginal contact to match the similarly-themed Anal-oral contact. Otto4711 04:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per above deletes but also seems to fail Notability Test because it also isn't just a porn 'trick' - doesn't everybody do this - on purpose or accidently? -- Bec-Thorn-Berry 04:52, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This term never exited before this article was made.  Spinach Dip 10:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to anal sex per the reasons in the Ass to Mouth AfD. NeoFreak 13:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge with ass to mouth or anal sex. The term is not so notable (at least not as much as "ass to mouth").--Yannismarou 15:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Edison 16:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Here's what I think. I say start a new article, double dipping and merge this and the Ass to Mouth articles and redirect them there. These terms seem to be common in the porn community. ← A NAS  Talk? 17:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as garbage neologism. Ravenswing 18:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination --Mhking 19:31, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * 'Delete because it lacks sources to pass WP:NEO, and I'm sorry I read that page.-- danntm T C 04:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I think that a special compilation page might be a better place for all the stubs related to possibly nonexistant sexual acts. But in any event, this is more of an urbandictionary definition than an encyclopedic article.  As such I think it might even be speediable for giving no assertion of context whatsoever: it's simply a definition and a brief discussion of health risks.  If there's a discussion of importance, or of context or something else it might be encyclopedic, but as it is, it's not. Wintermut3 06:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. &mdash; Deckill e r 19:18, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Hello32020 22:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * 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.