Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Seduction community


 * 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. BD2412 T 21:36, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Seduction community
It does not appear that any of the quotes are properly sourced (or from anything notable). The topic also seems a bit narrow. — UDScott (talk) 18:04, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 19:00, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. ~ UDScott (talk) 18:04, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Agreed whole-heartedly with the nomination; poor sourcing and topic scope. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 21:44, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom; very poor quotes.--Collingwood (talk) 06:52, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Topic scope is just wrong. No objection to individual pages on the persons quoted, if they can be demonstrated to be independently and quotably notable (which I doubt). BD2412 T 18:40, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and BD2412. Notwithstanding the existence of a Wikipedia article on this topic, the notional "community" is not an appropriate basis for organizing quotes on the subject of seduction. Note that the quoted persons have been found non-notable at Wikipedia . ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:27, 11 October 2012 (UTC)