Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Playboy Playmates of 2019


 * 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. No prejudice against creating a redirect to the decade article, but there was not enough discussion of that to declare a consensus result for it. RL0919 (talk) 19:44, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

List of Playboy Playmates of 2019

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:NLIST, which states a list must have been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources. Note the sources plural. The only organization discussing these as a group is in fact Playboy itself. We are not a directory of Playboy models. All it seems to be doing is listing a bunch of non-notable women, which opens up the doors to all sorts of BLP issues, and then just lists their body measurements, an obviously sexual detail. I fail to see how it is in any way encyclopedic. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:40, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:40, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Delete this and all other Playboy Playmate list articles for reasons listed here; the sources used in this article and every other "Playboy Playmate" article all seem to be primary and definitely not fitting for WP. wizzito &#124; say hello!  19:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:58, 26 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. Playmates have certainly been discussed as a group, e.g. "Seven Tenths Incorrect: Heterogeneity and Change in the Waist-to-Hip Ratios of Playboy Centerfold Models and Miss America Pageant Winners" in The Journal of Sex Research, Harding, Les, A Biographical Dictionary of Playboy Magazine's Playmates of the Month, 1953-1979 (McFarland 2019) and Edgren, Gretchen. The Playmate Book: Six Decades of Centerfolds (Taschen 2005) (although the last may not be entirely independent). pburka (talk) 21:02, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. gnu 57  21:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:17, 26 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Articles about small groups (like Family of Barack Obama) work well when the subjects have received significant RS coverage as a set, and the article omits irrelevant personal details. This on the other hand is twelve pseudobiographies stapled together. The sources suggested by Pburka contain information about various Playboy magazine models, but not about the particular group of people who were featured in 2019. I share the nominator's view of the body measurement parameters in Template:Infobox Playboy Playmate. Cheers, gnu 57 22:27, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * We have lists of of Playboy Playmates for every year from 1954 through 2019, presumably split up due to WP:SIZE. Is it your position that some of these sublists are notable, but not 2019? pburka (talk) 23:32, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that the general concept Playboy Playmate is probably notable, and that some individual Playboy models may warrant stand-alone BLPs, but the format of the year-by-year lists allows for a lot of low-quality pseudo-bios of non-notable people. (List of people in Playboy 2010–2020 is a somewhat better format IMO.) gnu 57 04:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Unsure at this time. Surely there are past AfDs of porn individuals in which editors have voted "Redirect to List of such-and-such...", so I would be hesitant to undercut a likely landing spot for numerous incoming redirects. But the current format is wasteful fanboy bloat. Who shot the pics is irrelevant, as is their body measurements. Toss those, toss the entire "personal details" infobox, retain the name, the pictorial month, and date and place of birth. Once all this is on a single line, you could easily do List of Playboy Playmates (2010-2019) and condense sixty-six(!) articles into eight. If there's interest, I could try to mock up what the 2010-19 one would look like in a sandbox. Zaathras (talk) 04:11, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Something similar already exists: please see List of people in Playboy 2010–2020. Cheers, gnu 57 04:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think the decades list is a much superior way to cover the topic anyway, no need for the years. A simple list by decade is more than enough. CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:34, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree that the current format is less than ideal and would support merging or rewriting. pburka (talk) 12:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh. Well, there we go then. :) Individual year articles serve no purpose. Zaathras (talk) 01:23, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete all of the per-year articles, per the above pointing out that by decade lists already exist. Zaathras (talk) 01:23, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete all per-year articles; none meet WP:LISTN for lack of significant secondary coverage. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:19, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect all to the per-decade articles; this is just a WP:CFORK of those lists plus a COATRACK for biographies of non-notable people. I hope that all the other articles of this form can be redirected based on consensus here and without a follow-up discussion. User:力 (power~enwiki,  π,  ν ) 18:16, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete all This is basically Wikipedia promoting a cite as notable which really is not. It is one of our last relics of our past unjustified overcoverage of pornography.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete A mess, in my opinion. By the way, was redirected here for some reason (was looking for an actress, to be honest). Will try and see if "Meagan Moore" is an actress or a Playboy playmate... :)--Filmomusico (talk) 19:09, 2 August 2021 (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.