User talk:Allenknott3

The anti nudity team is back at it again, i see. don't see how an AFD about 2019 playmates, where playmates have no real notability any more in the press, can compare to their cultural relevance in the 60s-80s. so i agree with your rollbacks, there should be another AFD to see if that's really the consensus.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 14:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Playboy Playmates of XXXX There's now a discussion prompted by concerns raised by ourselves and others. Keep in mind you don't have a lot of edits, so providing a reasoned explanation is always helpful, no matter which way you think it should go.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 20:10, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Allen, the close was "no consensus", which means the redirects are to be reverted! No one had done that yet, but I went through them all and did that through 2018. 2019 was deleted in the prior AFD, and I'm fine ending at 2018, the cultural relevance of Playboy really died down by then.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 18:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Milowent Yes, I just noticed that. I did not realize that was the case when I first comment. I thought they had been redirected. However, why are some of the pages seemly have less information about the girls than before? For example, on the 2017 pages most of the information, i.e. the girl's measurements had been removed. I personally think they should including 2019 and 2020 simply to have a complete list. So we have everyone from 1954 to 2020 because technically they are no longer playmate of the month. Since for right now at least, Playboy is doing it only seasonal. Allenknott3 (talk) 18:26, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think there was some other discussion about removing the measurements from the playmate template, I am not wading into that, maybe others will. But I'd say you are free to be bold and create 2019 and 2020 articles to finish the list, your argument is logical.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 20:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]