Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tit torture


 * 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   redirect to BDSM. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:20, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Tit torture

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A few days ago, I went through the list of references in this article (no references were inline citations, by the way) and removed quite a few of them, as they were either self published books or had publishers that weren't reliable. The three that are left are also questionable, but I left them because their publishers seem at least slightly okay, even if I don't know what the contents of the books are.

Then I went on a search for sources myself to see if there was actually any. A few small mentions in Google News that add up to nothing. And, while Google Books came up with quite a few hits, none of the books seem to have any substance besides a paragraph here and there in a few, such as this and this. As you can see, they're both just used in a list of more or less dictionary definitions.

This article can perhaps be redirected to a list of BDSM terms, which I assume we have somewhere, where two or three sentences are allocated to it. But I don't suggest much more than that. Silver seren C 00:32, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Some background info -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 04:47, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Is that relevant to the article's notability (or non-notability)? Silver  seren C 04:48, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps related to WP:COI -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 05:29, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * For whom? The guy who made the article? Yeah, that's true. Since it was made as a promotion for his site, more or less. But I don't think that should reflect for or against notability. Silver  seren C 05:32, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Fine. I don't have any opinion on the notability of the article. I just wanted to make sure that whoever !votes in this AfD is aware of that. -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 05:35, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Redirect as per nom. SirAppleby (talk) 09:55, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect to BDSM. Slang term that serves as a good excuse for spicy photos to promote spicy books in the links. This is a commercial page about an un-encyclopedic topic. Carrite (talk) 16:34, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect to BDSM per all above. ⁓ Hello  71  23:35, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:30, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect to BDSM and make new section for the performance.-- GoShow (............................)   17:36, 15 October 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.