Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of models and performers by cup size


 * 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 -- JForget 02:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

List of models and performers by cup size

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Unreferenced list, focused on porn stars. Wikipedia is not a directory. List hasn't been updated since its inception. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete can I call facepalm as my argument? Yng  varr  15:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom  Bluegoblin  7   15:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 16:06, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Umm…yeah, Delete per all of the above. Besides, what about A - C? oh, nevermind… — Travis talk  16:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'd give a reason that this is impossible to verify, but I think I'd be trampled by the onslaught of volunteers.  So let's just say it doesn't meet WP:RS in these days of surgical augmentation. Accounting4Taste: talk 16:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete but don't tell the cabal. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 16:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Baleet it, desu. DESU DESU DESU? (talk) 16:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - and snow it. D.M.N. (talk) 16:39, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as I had said before I needed this for an Asignment, I stongly believe this article should stay.Rlk89 (talk) 16:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not a valid argument, your necessity does not dictate the encyclopedia's content. If it's such a big deal, save it to your hard drive before we nuke it. (On a tangental note, what class would you need this for? Just so I can sign up. =P) Oh, and delete as per nom. &spades;P M C&spades; 17:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Pretty much the definition of indiscriminate information.  People who stumble upon this article are probably looking for something more like List of big-bust models and performers, which itself should probably be deleted, but that's another debate. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  17:54, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed. It's Articles for deletion/List of big-bust models and performers.  &#9786; Uncle G (talk) 20:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * As well as Articles for deletion/List of big-bust models and performers 2nd, Articles for deletion/List of big-bust models and performers (3rd nomination), Articles for deletion/List of big-bust models and performers (4th nomination), Articles for deletion/List of big-bust models and performers (5th nomination) and Deletion_review/Log/2006_December_22. LaMenta3 (talk) 21:02, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I think either this article or one very similar (perhaps a list of big-bust models and performers by size?) was nominated for deletion a few months ago and was kept. I can see how this list is indiscriminate as compared to the other, though, as size is more germane to that topic than just the broad one this one covers (no pun intended?). If it is alright with all those involved here already, I would like to notify a couple editors I know who are better acquainted with deletion issues in this area about this discussion. LaMenta3 (talk) 18:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Do you have a link to that other page? &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 18:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I couldn't remember the name of it, so I had to search for it. It's List of big-bust models and performers. (Which upon edit conflict UncleG seems to have pulled out, as well.) If my memory serves me correctly, the deletion nomination was the result of an edit war that had gone on, on the page, so it wasn't your standard deletion discussion. However, some of the participants both in that edit war and the discussion may have some insights into what could be done with this particular list. I suppose that if there's anyone on this list that fits the criteria that were settled upon for the other list who's not already on there, we could merge that information. But as far as listing models and performers by cup size, that seems something more suited to a category, if anything, though perhaps not one suited to Wikipedia. (Boobpedia on the other hand, is primarily categorized in that manner.) LaMenta3 (talk) 20:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:LIST and per nom. Recommend a WP:SNOW closer. Tiptoety  talk 19:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Good grief.  KleenupKrew (talk) 22:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Demand to be Keep Please don't comment with nonsense(very few substantial comments)Rlk89 (talk) 04:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: You already casted your vote above. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete but transwiki to Wipipedia or some other sex-related wiki. Does not meet Wikipedia's standards or guidelines, e.g. WP:LIST and WP:NOT. --Solumeiras talk 11:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete for several reasons: 1. Too broad a criteria; in theory could have tens of thousands of names athough in this case there are only a few listed suggesting to me this might have been an abandoned project, 2. Impossible to verify and source everyone; the majority of such lists involve guesswork and OR and at the moment there are no sources at all on this list, and 3. Vandalism magnet. Someone could go in there and change one of the listings or add Harrison Ford to one of them and if it's not caught it could sit there for weeks before anyone noticed (assuming the list grew beyond the half-dozen or so names currently there. 23skidoo (talk) 14:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Have we hit WP:SNOW yet? &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:41, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * merge -- I find the keep arguments at Articles for deletion/List of big-bust models and performers convincing. I think this article should be merged with that one.  Geo Swan (talk) 09:14, 19 January 2008 (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.