Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cranking (fetish)


 * 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 merge to Foot fetishism. If pedal pumping is restored, material can be merged there as desired and redirects created/retargeted as well, but restoring a redirect is not quite in scope of an AFD. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:05, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Cranking (fetish)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability and also misnaming. There's a fetish, based on feet, for 'pedal pumping', That's not what's described here (we already have pedal pumping) and there's no indication of separate notability. Merge anything useful (if any) and delete. Not even worth a redirect. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge to Foot fetishism, for failing WP:GNG, also WP:NOTDIC, WP:NEO. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:09, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I think there's enough to revive the article at pedal pumping, with this merged in. It's narrower than foot fetishism in general. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:16, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge to Foot fetishism and make the existing page a redirect. Not a broad enough to warrant its own article. Although the nominator states we already have the similar pedal pumping, this is just a redirect to Foot fetishism, which contains no content about pedal pumping. --John B123 (talk) 08:40, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It used to have an article on pedal pumping, and the sources in cranking are more about pedal pumping and would be usable for it. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:29, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Even with Cranking (fetish) and the former content at pedal pumping merged, it would still be a stub. However, if you feel you can make a properly referenced start class article out of the two, then go for it. --John B123 (talk) 16:17, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, I get all the best jobs. 8-(  Andy Dingley (talk) 15:13, 17 June 2019 (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.