Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of commercial seduction teachers


 * 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. Jaranda wat's sup 17:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

List of commercial seduction teachers

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Is this article really necessary? It seems with the nomination of the template 'notable members of the seduction community' and deletion of Real Social Dynamics and Badboy Lifestyle that this is the next step. It seems like little work is being done to improve the page, looks like its probably been sitting idle for a fair while. And it seems redundant with the category notable members of the seduction community anyway. Thoughts? THE KING 16:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. It meets WP:LIST. Mathmo Talk 16:52, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Categories don't replace lists and lists don't replace categories. If only for visibility of editing (changes in lists are detected by watchlist). Mathmo Talk 00:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not the Yellow Pages. This is clearly a directory entry, which wikipedia is WP:NOT. WP:LIST is not a content policy, it is a guideline, and largely a style-guide at that, and cannot trump policy. Agent 86 19:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete along with the non-notable characters linked to. Jefferson Anderson 22:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Made redundant by Template:Notable_Members_of_The_Seduction_Community. --SecondSight 07:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. This debate should probably be paused until is resolved first. --Amit 12:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I see no reason to hold off on this debate. Regardless of the results of the discussion on the template, and even if seduction teacher were an article, neither of those factors cures the fact that this is simply a directory and contrary to WP:NOT. Agent 86 17:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Agent 86 and delete the template too. Cloachland 03:36, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree that this seems like a directory. Gimmetrow 20:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Usedup 16:58, 18 February 2007 (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.