Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swedish Erotica 12

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 of the debate was delete. If anyone actually creates a page on the series message me and I'll restore to allow a merge. Until then merge is not an option. Petros471 18:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Swedish Erotica 12[edit]

Delete. I do not believe this article describes a film sufficiently notable to merit its own article. — Mike • 04:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, in principle. Normally, I don’t care if an article on a pornographic movie/actor/actress/whatever survives or fails an AfD nomination. However, the nomination for this and the other pornography-related articles by this editor does not provide any substantive reasoning to support the allegation of insufficient notability. As a result, I am left to make assumptions, and the assumption I make is that the nomination is in some way related to censorship. Wikipedia is not censored. Even if I assume good faith, notability is a concern for any article, but it is not the sole criterion. Wikipedia:Notability is not policy or a guideline. The real question is: "is it encyclopedic?" In any event, this {{stub}} article contains information that supports an allegation of notabilty. Based upon WP:5P and WP:NOT, this article may very well be. Without any other reason, I cannot support deletion. Agent 86 06:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unless someone can add anything to this (the article has not been updated since it was created in January). Having one notable actor doesn't necessarily make the movie notable. There's nothing else to assert the movie's notability. --Coredesat 10:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - nn porn. Proto///type 14:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm conflicted enough that I can't "vote", but maybe I can provide enough information for other people to be able to. See the AFDb entry and IMDb entry for the film. In favor of keeping it would be that: the movie is part of a notable series (Swedish Erotica); it is chock full of other notable actors (the legendary John Holmes, Jamie Gillis, Juliet Anderson); it is the only appearance of Bambi Woods outside Debbie Does Dallas; finally, it does get 13,300 Google hits, which is certainly Googlebombing, but compare it to 677 Google hits for "Swedish Erotica 11" or 529 for "Swedish Erotica 13". In favor of deletion would be that it is just another compilation film, no real plot; number 12 in a series; and while the article we have can be expanded from the IMDB plot summary and actors listing, it will never be longer than 2-3 paragraphs. For what it is worth, if it is kept, I'm willing to expand it to that. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 14:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but move to Swedish Erotica and expand into an article on the Swedish Erotica series. This was a very notable series of films, but there were, of course, dozens of them, so doing an individual article on each might be pushing it. IMO this particular film passes the (non-policy) WP:PORN guidelines (which I stress again are not policy and should not be used as the sole deciding factor), and would make a good starting point for a larger article on the series itself (although at the present time it's little more than a stub). 23skidoo 15:31, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Swedish Erotica. Series is notable, the individual movies aren't. -- GWO
Merge per GWO.--Isotope23 19:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge --->|Newyorktimescrossword 22:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)|[reply]
Merge to a series page per above, if anyone has the motivation, or else delete - nothing on this page worth saving by itself. -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 22:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Since the article "Swedish Erotica" does not yet exist, how do you propose that we merge the content "Swedish Erotica 12" there? --Alex S 06:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or otherwise keep, this movie is notable as some of the only "evidence" of Bambi Woods' career, b/c what happened to her is a mystery. PseudoAnon 06:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Very minor production. Calsicol 22:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.