Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sexy Philippine actresses


 * 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, WP:SNOW. postdlf (talk) 02:47, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

List of sexy Philippine actresses

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This was PRODed but there is no reason it should exist until Nov 25. Call it WP:POV or WP:OR or whatever, unfortunately there is no clear CSD criteria for it or I would use that. This list serves no purpose. It should be snow'ed. § FreeRangeFrog 21:11, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 *  Comment Delete. I have to admit I can't see a good reason to delete this or keep this. I have to ask: What policy or guideline is being violated here? It's in compliance with WP:LIST. Since the subject is actresses, it's hard to believe that reliable sources can't be found that refer to them or the roles they played as "sexy", so I'm not sure the original research argument holds here either. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment If we can't come up with a reason for something to be included in the encyclopedia, then it shouldn't be included. But ignoring that for a moment, can you give me a formal, encyclopedic definition of "sexy" that isn't POV or OR, and isn't a potential BLP concern for all the people included in that list? Or even better, a potential formal title for the list, assuming there was a reason for keeping it in the first place. § FreeRangeFrog 21:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Formal encyclopedic definition and relevant related articles are right there at the disambiguation page sexy. I agree with your point; all I'm saying is there are plenty of sources with lists of "top sexiest actresses of 2012" or whatever, that could be used to support some entries on this list. A title change like List of Filipina actresses judged 'sexy' by popular press would be better. Or maybe a category. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:35, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - while some users feel that all hotties are notable, I rather disagree. Bearian (talk) 22:31, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Heh. I didn't know about that essay. Thanks. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:35, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as vague, possibly subjective and not a significant category: "popularly associated" is a very vague claim, "sexy" is vague, and playing a sexy role however defined doesn't really put you in a discrete category that is analysed in depth by multiple writers. Would you allow list of tall Philippine actresses or list of Philippine actresses a majority of schoolboys would like to have intercourse with or list of Philippine actresses who've played nurses?  Wikipedia is not a site for movie trivia lists. Topics such as sexuality in Philippines cinema may well be notable, and even competitions/polls for the sexiest actress might be notable with sufficient media coverage, but this article is too far from any encyclopedic topic to rename, merge, or fix. --Colapeninsula (talk) 00:20, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per my PROD statement: "No demonstration of notability per the general notability guideline. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought and this list will be primarily populated by OR." Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:27, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Snow delete per nom and above. Obviously. TBrandley 00:27, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - I'm not trying to WP:OTHERSTUFF this but (as Cola suggested above) how is it any different to creating the article List of ugly Philippine actresses? It's POV social-media-type stuff which is entirely appropriate for The Chive or FHM, but not for WP. Stalwart 111  01:39, 21 November 2012 (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.