Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of anime and manga featuring omorashi


 * 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. L Faraone  03:55, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

List of anime and manga featuring omorashi

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This list meets most of the criteria of WP:Listcruft: it's 'of interest to a very limited number of people', 'Determining membership of the list involves original research', 'The list is unencyclopaedic', and arguably 'The list is a violation of Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information'. This list is almost entirely unreferenced, and essentially composed of original research, since 'omorashi' is a fan term without much use in reliable sources. Generally, 'list of media featuring X subject' is a bad idea for an article in any case, but this one is particularly bad. Wikipedia does not exist to help people feed their sexual fetishes. Robofish (talk) 17:32, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 12 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per Listcruft and DIRECTORY. I do not see why this list should be on wikipedia. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:11, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTDIR points #1 and #6. The only connections these anime and manga have with each other is that a character peed on themselves, even when such scene is non-sexual. Omorashi, however, is a sexual fetish that appears frequently in pornographic anime and manga. So much so that it is the equivalent of oral sex. We don't have List of pornographic films featuring oral sex because the scope of the list would be too broad. —Farix (t &#124; c) 13:32, 18 December 2010 (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.