Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Corset for children

Corset for children was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE

See also Votes for deletion/Corsets by oval chest, Votes for deletion/Health corset (previous locations of the article).

The content of this page is utter, utter nonsense. Delete, please. Katherine Shaw 08:58, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC) Many books say corsets are dangerously and many women in corset say corsets are safe and they stop if they have pain. But the damages are well-documented by X-ray picture. The truth is between; a many sex-year-old children will make the adult happy, and not crying by a daily constant pain. And the children are more robust than adult. The right answer is Delete becorset Wikipedia have any space too the unwanted truth. Haabet 11:37, 2004 Oct 29 (UTC)
 * "But if the corset is bad the children been sweeten good and well-behaved." ?!? Delete unless someone establishes sanity. Cool Hand Luke  09:16, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Not again! Incoherent content, delete. And ban User:Haabet for vandalism. - Mike Rosoft 09:28, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * It may be that someone quoted this (including the images) from some very old Victorian-type stuff. Likely, children in uncomfortable tight corsets were too bothered with the resulting chronic pain to play about. The NSPCC would have a lot to say against recommending those old hard methods of control. Anthony Appleyard 09:48, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: More evidence of a private, um, interest. Ok, I'll say it:  evidence of fetish.  Delete this as out of date, uninformative, and an excuse to show those pictures again. Geogre 12:30, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Concur with Geogre. Topic is also not encyclopedic. --Improv 17:33, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, along with the redirs created by its two moves. No useful content. Some of this user's other contributions on the topic may be salvageable, but not this one. Andrewa 17:47, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: there is no need to go around creating all these corset pages; anything that can be said can be said on Corset. I feel that User:Haabet is creating new pages in which to indulge his fetish rather than deal with being restrained on the main Corset page. For that matter, delete the previous names too.  &mdash;Morven 20:35, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete this corset fixation is, well, insane... Kiand 00:57, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * If anything verifiable can be merged, merge and redirect. Otherwise, delete.  -Sean Curtin 01:03, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * IMO, nothing in this article can be verified. - Katherine Shaw 13:23, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete to BJAODN No vote Gazpacho 12:28, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. It looks like a well-meaning attempt to add good content by someone whose english skills are poor. I had never heard of corsets made for children, but apparently they existed, and I would consider information about them encyclopedic. Isomorphic 21:29, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete' please. I've been working on the corset articles with Katherine and a few other folks. Haabet's contributions are garbled, inaccurate, and, well, insane. He keeps morphing and renaming the article to avoid deletion. Zora 21:50, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Nothing hurts like the truth.
 * Following Isomorphic, Merge to Corsets, as a separate section, abbreviated but yes, even keeping the image showing a child wearing one. Children have worn corsets, and people must surely have had opinions on how good corsets are for children. &#8212; Bill 22:36, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Beg to differ. I've done a lot of research on corsets, and nowhere have I found anything on corsets for children. Haabet apparently gets his pictures from patent files. If an inventor tried to patent a children's corset, so what? That doesn't prove anyone ever used one. Perhaps for spinal complaints ... but the usual treatment for that, in Victorian times, was lying on a board for specified periods. (See Alcott's Jack and Jill). Zora 22:47, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.