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. This is a list of people alleged to have appeared in a softcore pornographic magazine. It is unsourced, and in a random sample of the linked articles not one mentioned the appearance in this magazine. The WP:BLP requirement that contested content in biographical articles must be removed if it is not sourced outweighs all other considerations. This applies to all three nominated lists. Sandstein 11:03, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of people in Playmen 1968-1969[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Dubious notability. Few of the people in the list are notable. No sources, no relevance.

List of people in Playmen 1980-1989 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:10, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, essentially per nom. WP:LISTPEOPLE and WP:LSC advise that we shouldn't have lists of people who are non-notable themselves, and most of these names are redlinks. (WP:LSC specifically advises that '"Creation guide" lists—lists devoted to a large number of redlinked (unwritten) articles—don't belong in the main namespace.') In this case, no reliable sources are provided for any of these names, and I rather doubt they could be. Robofish (talk) 11:39, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, addressable problem. About the red links, the 90% of them are notable Italian actresses, they have articles in other-lenguages-Wikipedias and have enough books & news sources and film/tv/stage credits to easily pass WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR and to have an article in English Wikipedia. As said by WP:LSC, "it is reasonable to expect the articles about these persons could be forthcoming in the (short) future", and I'm personally working on that, as from yesterday I created articles about Martine Brochard, Jenny Tamburi, Ines Pellegrini, Lory Del Santo, Anna Maria Rizzoli and more. No prejudice in speedily renaming for deletion these articles in one/two months if the red likns will still appear too much.Cavarrone (talk) 11:38, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B music ian 11:51, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, most are already notable here, or notable in other language wikis. — Cirt (talk) 03:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unsourced and horribly noncompliant with BLP requirements. I doubt that actress Judi Bowker posed for a pictorial for this softcore mag at the age of fifteen, as this "article" would have it; I doubt that Oscar-winning actress Anna Magnani posed for it at the age of 62. I doubt that 46-year-old actress Gabriella Giacobbe signed on as the magazine's monthly "playmate" in 1969. Wikipedia in no way benefits from a misleading list of female celebrities that a softcore magazine republished wire service and publicity photos of, a list of the first names from the pseudonyms of nonnotable centerfold models, or an absurdly unnecessary list of back cover advertisements. No reliable secondary sources to be seen for the majority of entries, a rather fatal problem. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 02:48, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

from what did you argued that all the people who are present in the magazine posed "nude" for it? Playmen was not simply a "softcore" magazine, but it always had a cultural side, it interviewed during its history names like Allen Ginsberg, Jean Luc Godard, Federico Fellini, Woody Allen, Jean Paul Sartre, Gore Vidal, Roman Polanski, Lee and Susan Strasberg, Sergio Leone, Robert De Niro,William Burroughs... and I doubt any of them posed nude Cavarrone (talk) 04:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I argued nothing of the sort; did you even bother to read what I wrote? I doubt that many of those listed posed for the magazine at all. As I actually said, it appears that the magazine "republished wire service and publicity photos" and such, and it violates BLP to associate the subjects of those photos with an "adult entertainment magazine" which was most noted for its "featured photographs of nude women" (as its WP article points out in its lede) with no reliable sourcing whatsoever. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 04:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but unlink those with no article and cite. Delete if no reliable citations can be found. Playmen appears to have been a major publication in Italy, and many gained their start by gracing its pages the article says. Some of these women have gone on to become famous, including one of the biggest sex symbols of all time, Brigette Bardot. Between that AND it being the magazine that first published the infamous Jackie O' nude photo, I'd say it had a major global impact. Given that fact, I don't see how we can allow lists of; Playboy, Time, Forbes, Vogue, etc., and exclude this. We just need to get rid of the red links and cite I think. I deleted Judy Bowker from the list, seems like trouble suggesting anyone on that magazines staff would have anything to do with something like that, not to mention suggesting Judy Bowker actually did that without any proof. I saw the cover of the issue in question, her name is clearly not on it. Maybe she was interviewed inside? I dunno, but with no proof she doesn't belong. There's rumor she did. Ken Tholke (talk) 19:32, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bardot in no way "gained her start" in this magazine, and there are still no reliable sources that the magazine did anything more than republish/recycle photos of virtually all the names on the list. Neither BLP nor RS makes an exception for erotica. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 03:21, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please point me in the direction you are getting this information from. I can't seem to find what you're claiming. Ken Tholke (talk) 10:53, 25 February 2012 (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.