Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tuntematon Maa


 * 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 no consensus for deletion, those who argued for the article to be kept in order to be merged are free to pursue that as normal. --Sam Blanning(talk) 01:24, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Tuntematon Maa


Fails all points of WP:WEB. Being the largest xxx forum in xxx country is not enough to be notable. --- RockMFR 20:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete I think it definently fails WP:WEB, Wikipedia is not a web directory for a standard dating website scope_creep 00:28, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not a "standard dating website". If you actually read it (which may be difficult, as it is in Finnish), you would note that very little of its content is dating. It has more discussion about BDSM in private relationships and BDSM events. I just wanted to point that out. J I P  | Talk 06:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:WEB disagrees with this pages' existance. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 02:43, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge to BDSM in Finland. Deserves at least a mention. J I P  | Talk 07:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Why do we have a BDSM in Finland article? Are we going to have BDSM in _____ for every country? --- RockMFR 07:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I created it as a result of Articles for deletion/Turun Baletti. If we won't have separate articles for each country, then where would this be covered? In the main BDSM article? J I P  | Talk 07:48, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Although I don't quite understand the circumstances surrounding that article's nomination/deletion, it seems like the speedy delete decision there indicates that Turun Baletti shouldn't be covered by Wikipedia at all. --- RockMFR 07:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge per JIP. I don't accept the argument that a subject not notable enough for its own article must never be covered at all.  For example, our bio articles about notable people typically name the subject's nonnotable spouse and children.  Also, I agree with JIP's reasoning re having a separate BDSM in Finland article. JamesMLane t c 09:06, 12 November 2006 (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.