Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Courageous Cunts


 * 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. Article deleted per consensus but content has been merged into Labia pride as requested by 3 !voters Philg88 ♦talk 06:49, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Courageous Cunts

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:NOTABILITY Boleyn (talk) 20:35, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:14, 11 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. While there has not been a great amount of coverage of this site in English, there are a couple of French news articles that provide significant coverage. If this article is not kept, I'd suggest that any useful content be merged to labia pride. gobonobo  + c 18:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep It has more refs than, say, all the entries in Category:Bondage magazines but actually has a socially redeeming value, despite the name. It should remain a stub. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 12:42, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 04:42, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Delete, the article doesn't really qualify under the GNG with the existing sources. Grognard 123chess456 (talk) 15:32, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:47, 26 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete, as a separate page, but merge info. The topic is notable, but focusing on this specific site – which describes itself as a protest page and was launched in 2012 – there is not much beyond a bunch of links through to other projects/sites and a rather striking logo. I couldn't see much evidence of activity at Flickr either (other projects, such as Labia Library and Large Labia Project are way more active and give a much clearer indication of what it is they do). References, while solid, namecheck this within a wider discussion and Le Nouvel Observateur appears to be more or less replaying the info from the Salon article – I couldn't find any sources beyond these and Marie Claire when I checked. As Gobonobo suggested, there should be a merge of info into labia pride as CC seems to fit as a protest site within the wider movement. Libby norman (talk) 10:05, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, but merge with labia pride. Seems like there are not very many outside sources referencing this webpage for it to merit its own page. Lyrric (talk) 06:17, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Maybe cut down to stub though, it has references including the reputable Salon --94.175.85.144 (talk) 11:04, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete It just doesn't meet the WP:GNG in my eyes. It may in the future, in which the article may be recreated, but I don't think it's at that 'notable' stage as of yet. Tutelary (talk) 00:27, 30 August 2014 (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.