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 nomination was Delete all. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 03:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion nomination cybergirlfest These pages are rampant playboycybergirlfancruft (See WP:CRUFT) on which a lot of effort has been spent, and which includes such fascinating statistical records such as for shortest cybergirl, lightest cybergirl etc. So... detailed fancruft, but still fancruft. The playboy cyber club website is a subsite of the same domain as playboy.com, on which we already have an article - Playboy Online. I'm not sure how WP:WEB applies to porn sites, but this is moot in this case as the cybergirl website is just part of playboy.com.

Some description of the cybergirl site could be merged into Playboy Online - bizarrely, that article (several months older than the cybergirl articles) remains a one line stub whereas this Playboy CyberClub website article is rich in detail and has spawned multiple daughter articles including possibly specially created articles on specific cybergirl porn models (which I don't have the patience to go through at the moment, but possibly these are questionable too) as well as special cybergirl page templates. (My personal opinion is that the Playboy Online article should be merged into the main Playboy magazine article, but lets take this one step at time)

Anyway, The cybergirl/coed of the week/month/year articles are nonnotable - most of the models are first-timers (according to Cyber Girl of the Week, not my personal experience), and anyway, these are all just sub-parts of features of the cybergirl subsite of the main playboy website.

Personal note: I vaguely remember nominating or being part of an afd for a similar article on playboy cybergirls very early in my wikipedia experience - the article creator was someone different though (he also liked to list all the girls individually for their own articles), and there weren't any daughter articles. the afd was successful and the article deleted but the various individual cybergirl model articles were overlooked by the closing admin (I remember asking about that but neither he or I could be bothered to go through the stack...perhaps we can find some doughty volunteers for this daunting task of playboy model research this time round). Oh well, I'll try to look into my hazy wikipast to try and find that long lost afd)

• Pages nominated:

• Playboy Cyber Club
• Playboy Cyber Girl (also the redirect Playboy Cyber Girls)
• Cyber Girl of the Week
• Cyber Girl of the Month
• Cyber Girl of the Year
• Coed of the Week
• Playboy Employee of the Month - girls who don't just model but also cheerlead, model in other ways, work in a McDonald's/funeral home/zoo etc.

• Templates nominated (I couldn't figure out how to paste the afd notice to link these with this discussion)

• Template:2000 Cyber Girls
• Template:2001 Cyber Girls
• Template:2002 Cyber Girls
• Template:2003 Cyber Girls
• Template:2004 Cyber Girls
• Template:2005 Cyber Girls
• Template:2006 Cyber Girls of the Week

• Categories nominated (yeah, I know. the template and categories should technically go on the template and category deletion pages. But it made more sense to bundle this stuff here)

• Category:Playboy Cyber Club
• Category:Playboy Cyber Girls (Intrepid volunteer playboy model researchers should establish their base camp here)
• Category:Playboy Coeds of the Week

Bwithh 06:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete all. --Bigtop (tk|cb|em|ea) 06:47, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all of it and all the girls that didn't make the print edition. Cybergirl = The Double-A of Playboy. Massive Guystypingwiththeirlefthandcruft. ~ trialsanderrors 07:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I could find a few passing references in Lexis, but not an article about the site per se. It may get adult film awards or something, though, so we'll see if the pages' creator can defend them. It might also be appropriate to keep some of this stuff after the AfD closes to give the creator time to merge a tiny bit of the content into some other article. Just a suggestion.--Chaser T 08:08, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete the lot of it per nom. Wow. I thought Internet memes were given undue notability by people who had personal experience with them, but I'm thinking this proves a certain theory about the organ with which some males think. Gah. GassyGuy 08:50, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Tagging categories and listing at CfD with a reference to this AfD. Luna Santin 12:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same for templates, but got a bit ahead of myself, as seen here (perma). Luna Santin 13:02, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all nominated articles My word, this is the best of the Internet or what? Porncruft of the highest degree and the lowest possible worth on Wiki. doktorb _words^deeds 16:02, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all as Porncruft. Darn it, Doktorbuk, you stole my protologism! --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 16:51, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all as porncruft. I <3 protologisms, too! -- Northenglish (talk) -- 22:12, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all, definitely cruft. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 00:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Good God - Delete all per above. Zos 04:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The templates are now at TfD here.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ais523 (talk • contribs)
  • Whoops, sorry for forgetting to sign that! --ais523 08:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Suitable for a Playboy wiki. Gizza^{Chat ©} 11:01, 11 July 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.