Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delicious Flat-Chest


 * 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. v/r - TP 19:25, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Delicious Flat-Chest

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested PROD with no evidence of notability per WP:NEO. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:56, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - obscure neologism apparently with almost nill use even among Anglophone otaku. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - "often used by ..." ummmm Cite needed, even 1 would be nice. WP:NEO Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 21:58, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete if two references to prove this are not added by the end of the week! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:45, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Searching Google News Archive with the topic in quotes yields nothing. Searching without the quotes yields a 100 year old newspaper article where those three words appear at random. Next, a 97 year old article.  Anime not yet thought of.   Not notable.  Feel free to try to convince me otherwise.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  04:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - What, there isn't a speedy deletion criterion like "G13. Stupid bullshit"? Carrite (talk) 05:25, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Original research of a neologism. —Farix (t &#124; c) 11:48, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Lolicon. The article is hardly OR - that is exactly what DFC means. But it's a pretty obscure term, much less widespread than Zettai ryouiki or many other things we have seen fit in our infinite wisdom to delete, so a redirect is enough. --Gwern (contribs) 14:07 30 July 2011 (GMT)
 * A redirect would be a likely candidate for deletion per WP:RFD #3 and #8. —Farix (t &#124; c) 14:23, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I hardly see how #3 applies, and #8 clearly doesn't apply inasmuch as this is not a foreign phrase such as a romanization of a random Japanese word nor is it a once-in-a-lifetime typo. --Gwern (contribs) 17:47 2 August 2011 (GMT)
 * Delete What does it mean "prod contested by -84.85.189.88" . Can you remove a prod on someone else's behalf?  Also, why was it prodded for three years before someone removed the prod? This article is original research and rather stupid.  To say people will suddenly be attracted to small breasts because they see them less often, makes no sense at all.  And flatchested is NOT lolicon.  The examples of flatchested women in anime are series dedicated to a female audience, and women hate it when someone has bigger breasts than them.  And The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya has one of its main characters with big breasts, the smaller breasted main character stating her jealousy of them early on.  Someone just tossed random examples on the page without checking apparently.   D r e a m Focus  12:18, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * For a prod deletion it can be contested at any time, even after it is deleted. But after it is deleted it needs administrator assistance to bring it back, so people ask at WP:REFUND.  This happened in this case!  This Afd is popular so a clear consensus will override prod objections. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:11, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. No references from verifiable sources.--Zalinda Zenobia (talk) 17:08, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Snow Delete The article fails per WP:OR, WP:V, and WP:NOTABILITY. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:06, 2 August 2011 (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.