Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Breast caressing


 * 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. JForget 03:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Breast caressing

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested PROD that I had to bring here. A user with a long and dedicated history of breast editing has put a lot of effort into this instruction manual. It is, however, only that. Some of my favorite passages include breast-to-hand-size ratios for full effect, and "required breast size" for specific techniques. Steamroller Assault (talk) 22:04, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as blatant violation of WP:NOTHOWTO (and possible original research). EALacey (talk) 22:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Steamroller Assault and EALacey, as violation of WP:NOTHOWTO and original research. He seems to have *uuhhhh...* conducted a lot of research in this area. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  23:29, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as not a how-to manual and no original research. Somehow breasts have turned into WP:BOLLOCKS!  A few good WP:GNOME edits by the author to other unrelated articles, though.  I suspect a number of sex-related articles are similarly afflicted, as with the edit I had to make to Mummification (BDSM) diff after stumbling upon it.  I don't know that I want to investigate further. Шизомби (talk) 23:46, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Even enjoyable original research is still original research.  The existence of a Wikipedia article, like the caressing of breasts, depends upon overcoming another person's objections.  Mandsford (talk) 00:00, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per above. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:01, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. And in the words of Louis Armstrong, if you need to be told you're never going to know. --NellieBly (talk) 02:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete any useful sourced content could easily be added to the main article. however, i dont see any here. bye bye. and perhaps the user who created this could work somewhere less troublesome. start small, and gentle, work your way up to bigger things, let WP get used to you... oh, i think maybe thats bad advice here.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:17, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Preserve.:

This is article is well sustained, it is not instruction but encyclopedic article and no deletion should be applied. Selecting adequate pictures is in process. If needed the article can be expanded with little more information. Merry Christmass!

Smart Sage (talk) 15:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

This article was revised and edited numerous times last night and the intentions which were - to remove typos, to improve style and to enrich the content, were completed.

What is left is of course to be seen zillion times all over the world for the encyclopedic sake.

You are free however to add or edit what you consider in it, as well as I am.

Merry Christmass!

Smart Sage (talk) 15:37, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as per everyone except the article creator. Edward321 (talk) 02:25, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as per comments above. But, what happened here? On December 28 somebody (76.100.202.245) deleted about 80% of the article's content, leaving little more than a stub. Is that appropriate during an AFD discussion? --MelanieN (talk) 03:44, 1 January 2010 (UTC)MelanieN
 * Deleting article content during an AfD can be done: Guide_to_deletion. Deleting unsourced nonsense in particular makes sense, especially when it is clear the owner of the article did not have and does not care to add sources. Шизомби (talk) 04:34, 1 January 2010 (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.