Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Devine (2nd nomination)

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 was delete. Tone 13:00, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Devine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:PORNBIO (one nomination in entire finished career does not satisfy second prong) and general notability guidelines. No significant coverage in reliable sources. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete What point of WP:ENT is she supposed to fullfill, and where are the third-party independent secondary sources covering her carreer or her person? (and she was only nominated?) That prod should have never been removed. --Enric Naval (talk) 00:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Passes WP:ENT criteria 1. Actress has appeared in over 140 productions. WP:PORNBIO are criteria for inclusion, not exclusion. Chuthya (talk) 03:18, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: None of them significant roles nor significant films. Morbidthoughts (talk) 03:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Strictly speaking, PORNBIO is neither a criteria for inclusion nor exclusion. It is simply short hand for determing if something is likely to be notable. The only inclusion criteria, is always, coverage in reliable secondary sources. This article fails ent, as Chuthya and KevinOKeeffe have explained, fails PORNBIO, and has no demonstrated significant coverage in reliable secondary sources Nil Einne (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Delete Not even remotely Notable. Its not just a question of this article (the body of which consists of thirteen words) utterly failing WP:Pornbio criteria; its that there's almost no content to this article at all, and certainly nothing in it which even plausibly hints at Notability. If this article is Notable, then by definition, every single pornographic film actress in history is Notable. And clearly, that is not the case. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 05:03, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per WP:PORNBIO Greenleaf (talk) 06:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:29, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:BIO. 86.164.58.117 (talk) 14:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Morbidthoughts (talk) 19:20, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:PORNBIO. Does not present intersections of reliable independent secondary sources. Algébrico (talk) 01:51, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per Morbid, Kevin and Algébrico, also Morbid's reply to Chutya Nil Einne (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Fails WP:PORNBIO. Niteshift36 (talk) 09:59, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - Plenty of movies, notable events and info. Just nobody bothers to put them down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.5.136.39 (talk) 20:22, 12 August 2009 (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.