Talk:Female Pleasure
Add topic | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
copyvio? and G11?
[edit]Looks like off wiki content was taken from this article. This was accepted via AfC by Frayae, so I think we could think about that in the context of "unambiguously promotional". Not concerned to decline the speedy.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:05, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- Being accepted at AFC is meaningless in cases such as this where it's blatantly promotional and a copyright violation. There is not a single sentence of this which isn't explicitly an advert for the film. Praxidicae (talk) 14:32, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- The summary section was taken directly from the press release and this is even used as its reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Female_Pleasure_(film)&oldid=862470199 Rmhermen (talk) 14:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- Feel free to delete away. I think perhaps the topic is notable, that's not a good reason for G12 material to be kept or a COI to be ignored now it become apparent. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 16:56, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
Contested deletion
[edit]This page should not be speedily deleted because the article describes the film and its plot. It does not server only to promote the movie. There are indipendent references for all the content and no wrong information is on the page. Also there is no copyright infringement since we have the allowance to use the synopis and set the reference.
We do not understand why it should not be on wikipedia. Other movies like Jurassic Park have the same information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Feinheit (talk • contribs) 14:08, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- Feinheit Who is we? Praxidicae (talk) 14:43, 10 October 2018 (UTC)