Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Kimberley Stanfield - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

344:— due diligence is not being done when these tools are being used in this way. "Shoot them all and let the saps at AfD sort them out," is apparently the line of thinking. While I am personally sympathetic to the idea of a very high bar for so-called "Porn Bios," this blasting of 100 articles at the rate of 1 per minute, judging from the time logs, is not conducive to the spirit or practice of AfD. It is putting 273:. Redirecting non-notable articles to Listings of a subject which has been found to be non-notable is absurd. Playmate-hood, being inherently non-notable, does not prop up this article, nor can it prop up a List of playmates. Redirecting to non-notable lists only makes work for Admins who will have to delete these redirects later. Also, significantly, this is an inadequately-sourced BLP in a controversial area. 349:
sororities. The net result of these efforts was a lot of lost time by article creators and AfD participants and a lot of lost information from those articles annihilated as part of these campaigns. Meanwhile, the backlog of crap at New Pages festers. Something needs to be done about this problem. Mine is not a unique view — see
348:
ahead of the established article deletion process and is disrespectful both to the work of article creators and those of us who volunteer our time at AfD. We have seen similar automated mass annihilation efforts recently against modern Trotskyist political organizations and against fraternities and
264:
This should have been done after consensus determined Playmate-hood's non-notability. Other projects can cover this material, Knowledge (XXG) consensus has determined that Knowledge (XXG) is not that project. Should sourcing and claim of notability sufficient for Knowledge (XXG) later be found, the
203:
is not an award: It's a strategic commercial decision made by Playboy Corporation about how to better commercialize it products. Regardless of how much some Wikipedians love Playmates, we should write articles about them only when they were covered by independent third part sources. Also, texts
228:. Does not appear to be enough nontrivial reliably sourced content to justify an independent article. This has been the outcome of most recent AFD discussions for less prominent Playmates as well the way most recently named Playmates have been handled. 161: 51:. Consensus is closest to redirection; redirecting without deletion can facilitate merging or the re-establishment of a separate article upon presentation and citation of further sourcing to establish 340:- The use of automated tools for mass deletions should not be allowed against large blocks of articles which have already been patrolled at New Pages. It is, simply put, a violation of 122: 155: 192: 314: 294: 95: 90: 99: 82: 291: 17: 225: 47: 176: 143: 233: 345: 382: 36: 137: 229: 367: 329: 306: 282: 254: 237: 215: 64: 353:
at ANI. We need to keep them all as a matter of principle and ban the future use of automated tools in this way.
133: 381:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
86: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
183: 60: 356:
This argument will be copied-and-pasted in the debate sections for all automated AfDs of this campaign.
278: 169: 78: 70: 341: 149: 363: 325: 302: 250: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
56: 350: 52: 209: 274: 351:
Knowledge (XXG):ANI#Massive_number_of_Playboy-related_AFD_nominations_by_a_single_user
359: 321: 298: 246: 116: 208:
are not the kind non-trivial coverage asked by the general notability criteria.
375:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
112: 108: 104: 168: 182: 193:Being a Playboy playmate does not make you notable 39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 385:). No further edits should be made to this page. 8: 313:Note: This debate has been included in the 315:list of People-related deletion discussions 312: 290:Note: This debate has been added to the 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 24: 226:List of Playboy Playmates of 2002 48:List of Playboy Playmates of 2002 46:redirect, without deletion, to 1: 265:article can be re-started. 402: 330:22:49, 28 April 2011 (UTC) 307:22:49, 28 April 2011 (UTC) 283:19:34, 28 April 2011 (UTC) 255:14:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC) 238:02:04, 28 April 2011 (UTC) 216:01:24, 28 April 2011 (UTC) 378:Please do not modify it. 204:solely related to their 32:Please do not modify it. 368:14:23, 4 May 2011 (UTC) 292:WikiProject Pornography 65:14:34, 6 May 2011 (UTC) 230:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz 197:Playmate of the Month 201:Playmate of the Year 245:as per Hullaballoo 79:Kimberley Stanfield 71:Kimberley Stanfield 346:WP:I DON'T LIKE IT 44:The result was 358: 332: 318: 295:list of deletions 213: 393: 380: 354: 319: 309: 211: 187: 186: 172: 120: 102: 34: 401: 400: 396: 395: 394: 392: 391: 390: 389: 383:deletion review 376: 338:Procedural Keep 289: 195:. Being chosen 129: 93: 77: 74: 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 399: 397: 388: 387: 371: 370: 334: 333: 310: 286: 285: 258: 257: 240: 190: 189: 126: 73: 68: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 398: 386: 384: 379: 373: 372: 369: 365: 361: 357: 352: 347: 343: 339: 336: 335: 331: 327: 323: 316: 311: 308: 304: 300: 296: 293: 288: 287: 284: 280: 276: 272: 270: 263: 260: 259: 256: 252: 248: 244: 241: 239: 235: 231: 227: 223: 220: 219: 218: 217: 214: 207: 202: 198: 194: 185: 181: 178: 175: 171: 167: 163: 160: 157: 154: 151: 148: 145: 142: 139: 135: 132: 131:Find sources: 127: 124: 118: 114: 110: 106: 101: 97: 92: 88: 84: 80: 76: 75: 72: 69: 67: 66: 63: 62: 58: 54: 50: 49: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 377: 374: 355: 337: 268: 266: 261: 242: 221: 206:playmatehood 205: 200: 196: 191: 179: 173: 165: 158: 152: 146: 140: 130: 59: 45: 43: 31: 28: 156:free images 53:notability 342:WP:BEFORE 322:• Gene93k 299:• Gene93k 275:Dekkappai 271:redirect 243:Redirect 222:Redirect 123:View log 360:Carrite 247:Hasteur 210:Damiens 162:WP refs 150:scholar 96:protect 91:history 262:Delete 134:Google 100:delete 61:tizzle 177:JSTOR 138:books 117:views 109:watch 105:links 57:Scien 16:< 364:talk 326:talk 303:talk 279:talk 251:talk 234:talk 170:FENS 144:news 113:logs 87:talk 83:edit 55:. — 269:NOT 267:Do 224:to 212:.rf 199:or 184:TWL 121:– ( 366:) 328:) 317:. 305:) 297:. 281:) 253:) 236:) 164:) 115:| 111:| 107:| 103:| 98:| 94:| 89:| 85:| 362:( 324:( 320:— 301:( 277:( 249:( 232:( 188:) 180:· 174:· 166:· 159:· 153:· 147:· 141:· 136:( 128:( 125:) 119:) 81:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
deletion review
List of Playboy Playmates of 2002
notability
Scien
tizzle
14:34, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
Kimberley Stanfield
Kimberley Stanfield
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL
Being a Playboy playmate does not make you notable
Damiens.rf

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.