Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Erotic spanking: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:09, 5 January 2007 edit68.215.139.253 (talk) []← Previous edit Revision as of 07:19, 5 January 2007 edit undoOtherone (talk | contribs)1,067 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 31: Line 31:
*'''Keeep''' as ]. This is a notable topic covered in a sensible manner. The whole point of Misplaced Pages is to have a breadth of coverage that is wider than a "''normal encyclopedia''". There is nothing ridiculous about ] that I can see. ]&nbsp;<sup><small>]</small></sup> 23:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC) *'''Keeep''' as ]. This is a notable topic covered in a sensible manner. The whole point of Misplaced Pages is to have a breadth of coverage that is wider than a "''normal encyclopedia''". There is nothing ridiculous about ] that I can see. ]&nbsp;<sup><small>]</small></sup> 23:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
* '''Strong Keep''' This user's reccommendation for deletion seems to be motivated primarily on her personal opinion of BSDM and its practitioners, something that, I'm sorry, is no reason to challenge Misplaced Pages's longstanding policy of noncensorship. No valid reason for deletion given. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 02:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned --> * '''Strong Keep''' This user's reccommendation for deletion seems to be motivated primarily on her personal opinion of BSDM and its practitioners, something that, I'm sorry, is no reason to challenge Misplaced Pages's longstanding policy of noncensorship. No valid reason for deletion given. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 02:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
*'''Keep''', bloody prudes. o''']'''r''']''' <sub>(])</sub> 07:19, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:19, 5 January 2007

Erotic spanking

Erotic spanking (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Strong Delete. This page contains much sexuality in its contents and quite a few inappropriate images. A normal encyclopedia would not have an article about this ridiculous erotic spanking. I think it is safe to assume that not too many users view this article, except those who are... unlike most, no offense. It is quite useless, in my humble opinion, and merely taking up space in Misplaced Pages. I did not expect many people to object. I am sorry if I have done something wrong by proposing the deletion of this article, it is just that I did not expect too many people to oppose my opinion. Please consider my suggestion to remove this article. I doubt it will greatly impact your life in a negative way if this article is gone, but I fear it is possible that the same cannot be said for others, especially younger users. Please support my suggestion. Thanks! Uioh 23:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete. Uio, I have pondered your words for a long, LONG, time, and I have finally decided to side by you. However, I am sorry, but please do not get your hopes up too much, as I am still pondering and my vote could change at any time. Thanks. Ntyfj 01:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

(Changed mind to Neutral)

  • Strong Keep. This has been nominated at least twice today with no reason specified at any time. Granted, this article could stand some clean-up and/or citations as noted, but it has existed for almost 5 years. Unless someone can provide a legitimate reason to delete this article, it should stay. HalJor 22:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Notable topic, adequately sourced. I would advise Uioh and HalJor to change their opinions to "Delete" and "Keep" as appropriate, incidentally. Tevildo 23:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - it's a legitimate topic. Misplaced Pages is not censored for content. Tunnels of Set 01:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I understand that Misplaced Pages is not censored, but it should be? Why ever reason not? Especially if at least one-fourth of its users ARE minors. If this article was removed, how would that harm Misplaced Pages or you? It COULD offend minors and their parents that use Misplaced Pages perhaps daily! At the very least, please remove the images, please! Are they necessary? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uioh (talkcontribs) 21:12, January 3, 2007 (UTC)
      • I'm sorry, but this is one of the foundation principles of Misplaced Pages. It's the responsibility of parents to prevent their children looking at "offensive" material, not for us to act as childminders. Tevildo 02:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - this subject is quite a bit more notable than autocunnilingus. Misplaced Pages is not censored. Lyrl C 01:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
I beg your pardon, but what do you mean by "notable"? Uioh 02:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Categories: