Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amber Rain (3rd 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. Cúchullain ^t/c 02:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amber Rain (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Notability can not be established especially with the new WP:BIO. No criteria for pornographic actress fulfilled. Vinh1313 (talk) 05:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment This discussion was originally appended to the first nomination; I moved it to a proper "3rd nomination" page. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 05:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete Per WP:CSD#A7. Fails WP:BIO as nominator mentioned. Biographies have to prove themselves, we don't have to wait. Speedy it. TheBilly (talk) 07:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete is, qualifies as CSD A7. Lankiveil (talk) 12:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
• comment this article has survived a previous AfD so cannot be speedy deleted. RMHED (talk) 14:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eh, oh well. In any case, it should be mentioned that the June 2, 2006 and July 28, 2006 versions (those previously submitted for deletion) both horribly fail per the current CSD A7 as well, and the two previous debates resulted in "No consensus" rather than keep. So it's only surviving thanks to 1) a technicality 2) changing standards 3) a couple bad straw polls by the mobs that happened to show up those days TheBilly (talk) 15:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per my argument at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amber Rain (2nd nomination) - no new notability has come up since then. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 15:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. She's just one of many non-notable porn actresses.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 03:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. TGreenburgPR (talk) 09:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --Sc straker (talk) 21:28, 6 January 2008 (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.