Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casey James

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. Redwolf24 09:37, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Casey James

GOOD GRACIOUS, look at that, that is hideous. What has become of modesty? Since when did breasts become these sick things? Do these women find that showing themselves like this is good? What of the children in their community? This is not even notable at all, not notable at all to be on here, less than the other two harlots DavidsCrusader 12:20, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Speedy keep Clueless newbie nomination. --Ryan Delaney talk 13:20, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. DavidsCrusader seems to be going through List_of_big-bust_models_and_performers and putting up VfDs for all of them. --GraemeL
  • Keep; if it wasn't a newbie, I would say WP:Point Lectonar 13:43, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete As with the above. Bhoeble 15:04, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. tregoweth 15:21, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep — invalid VfD criteria. — RJH 15:30, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep har, har.. you so funny--I-2-d2 15:33, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep as above. --Howcheng 16:17, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. I am seriously starting to wonder if DavidsCrusader isn't a clever parody of a fundamentalist Christian. Fernando Rizo T/C 17:08, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Sliggy 17:27, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, despite her being tasteless, she's also notable.Gateman1997 21:12, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. See also:
  • Keep Urgh... extremely disturbing, but notable just the same... Cyclone49 00:25, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete not notable -- she had to change her name because Jesse Jane had it already? Jess is a relatively new porn actress. --Noitall 00:44, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Per Cyclone49. --Apyule 02:11, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. We all make mistakes. Hall Monitor 17:02, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep It's an encyclopaedic entry. There's nothing about it that should warrant deletion. KeithD (talk) 20:23, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, without researching her notability, simply because the nomination is absolutely invalid. CanadianCaesar 23:46, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - It's religious trolling which is hideous. DreamGuy 00:31, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and kick that sick crusader who seems to spend an awfull lot of time looking for such pics. -- AlexR 00:41, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and ban the nominator. This is ridiculous. 23skidoo 03:30, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, I see nothing wrong with this. — JIP | Talk 05:01, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Nomination reminds me of Helen Lovejoy. Will somebody please think of the children!!!. And also, keep. Radiant_>|< 10:56, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep This user nominated this for VfD not because he thinks shes unnotable but because he said 'he wouldn't want his kids to see it' That falls under the vast umbrella of WP:NOT. Redwolf24 00:29, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


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.