Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prurience

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 redirect. Johnleemk | Talk 13:37, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Prurience

Transwikied to wiktionary. still just a dicdef. delete. --jfg284 ^{you were saying?} 16:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

• Redirect to Miller test; "prurient interest" is an important term of art in U.S. obscenity law. Smerdis of Tlön 17:14, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
• Possibly should redirect per Smerdis; "prurient interest" is one of the most widely quoted terms in one of the most widely discussed areas of USA law, especially at the Supreme Court level. But we don't need redirects for alternate forms of every topical word; in this case, "Prurient interest" is the only version that I think should have a redirect. Barno 21:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
• Transwiki complete so delete. Stifle 17:59, 13 January 2006 (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.