Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pornographic film actors by bust 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. SNOW is falling on busty twin peaks somewhere. Cirt (talk) 18:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Pornographic film actors by bust size
Prior related AFD discussions: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Apart from containing little information at the moment, it is probably a violation of WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Epbr123 (talk) 00:09, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete however, creator might want to copy this to their user page (userfy), and utterly rewrite, as follows: actually list them by bust size, not alphabetically (duh), expand list to include at LEAST 200 listings (there must be thousands to list here), with the cup size and cm/in. measure in the list for each, and maybe only include actors (and specify female actors) who have larger bust sizes, thus are notable for their busts. no redlinks without refs, dynamic list tag, etc etc. maybe ask for help in creating it. as it is, its utterly unencyclopedic, provides no useful infomration, and can be deleted without consequence.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:24, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete agree with nominator. --Fremte (talk) 01:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Joe Chill (talk) 02:02, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete This looks like a very silly article. Unless someone can rewrite it correctly, it doesn't belong here. Warrah (talk) 02:38, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Anyone can change their bust size (and often do, either up or down). Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 03:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as nonsense. Josh Parris 04:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Exit2DOS2000. That was one of the more hilarious delete rationales I've read in a while. Ray  Talk 05:01, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete unless someone does a lot of hands-on research. Despite the titillating title, this article has no content currently, and I doubt it will ever fill out. From the number of votes cast, its good to see that editors are keeping abreast of the situation. Ben Kidwell (talk) 07:16, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:INDISCRIMINATE.  Anna Lincoln  07:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Snow, and yeah WP:INDISCRIMINATE --Cleave and Smite, Delete and Tear! (talk) 13:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Now, a ranking by IQ would be worthwhile.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 14:22, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Original research, probably very enjoyable original research, but original research nonetheless. Mandsford (talk) 15:00, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete As soon as I stop with the ROTFLMFAO. Simonm223 (talk) 15:19, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete for no content. One, it's a misleading article title - currently it lists a few people alphabetically.  Second, goes into WP:INDISCRIMINATE and falls afoul of WP:LIST.  There is no content in here other than names; so tagged. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 19:47, 15 October 2009 (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.