Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angela Devi (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 No consensus to delete, default to keep. (non-admin close) RMHED (talk) 22:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Angela Devi

Doesn't appear to meet WP:PORNBIO, only seems to be notable to a small group of people. JoshuaD1991 (talk) 17:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Though I found three refernces to Ms. Devi as shown here:San Francisco Chronicle [1]- The Times of India [2]- Asian Times [3], they only mention Ms. Devi in passing and are not the focus of the articles. In addition, I could find no statement of Notability to establish inclusion. Sorry to say delete at this time. ShoesssS ^Talk 18:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - For starters she wasn't what I would consider to be a pornographic actress. She never appeared in any porn movies. She made no hardcore videos. She was pretty much just a nude model. As a model, she would fall under "significant "cult" following" in WP:ENTERTAINER. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hondo77 (talk • contribs) 18:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Gotta Agree with the "significant "cult" following, though it's kinda weak she was notable —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anadin (talk • contribs) 20:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I don't know how people can argue she wasn't a porn actress while she's under the categories: Category:Asian American porn stars, Category:American porn stars, Category:Porn stars who committed suicide, Category:Indian porn stars and Category:Female porn stars. She doesn't meet WP:PORNBIO, and I don't think she is notable enough for her own article. Xeron220 (talk) 21:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not anymore, she's not. Hondo77 (talk) 00:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Same rationale as Shoessss. Articles do not provide significant coverage and two of them are not intellectually independent from each other (same author basically plagiarising herself) Morbidthoughts (talk) 22:55, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)a[reply]
Keep - per above --THFFF (talk) 18:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No indepent reliable sources proves any notability. Tosqueira (talk) 03:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Is there anyone who really thinks that being one of a pair of actresses of Indian descent to become the first stars in the US porn business is not notable? Clearly cited in the article. I'm sure that in those 256,000 goggle hits and 444,000 Yahoo hits there are more reliable sources.Vegaswikian (talk) 23:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Is your assessment based on the asia times article with this statement "Angela Devi and Sunny Leone are two Indian girls who have hit big time in the US porn industry. Indian girls feature regularly on international porn sites, but never have any carried the tag of being stars, meriting a front-page display in a national newspaper here."? I hesitate to infer that they are the first Indian stars in America. The second sentence could imply that no indians have been stars at home (in India since the author is based in New Delhi) despite being featured internationally without knowing if Devi did receive a front-page display. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Vegaswikian. Tabercil (talk) 23:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per several of the arguments made here, but I think it's borderline. It needs to be improved to assert its notability, which is becoming more and more difficult since the relevant evidence is starting to disappear (for instance, her site where these issues were announced). Xihr 07:18, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete I think her coverage in the reliable sources found is too trivial. Epbr123 (talk) 04:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - being a nude model, with parents from India is not a claim to notability. --T-rex 22:35, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree that there is a lack of reliable information, but is anyone surprised being it the business she was in? Sometimes the significance of a topic, in this case one Angela Dhingra, is not so much the hard information garnered, but rather what the topic represented. It's been said that one Ms. Dhingra is only notable to a small amount of people. This is highly debatable. However, even if so, do we delete other important, but yet esoteric topics, because the vast majority of the world's population is not cognizant of such topic? I think even more important though, is the unique position she occupied in her allegedly short time with us. If I recall correctly, she was one of the first girls period ... to have a successful internet presence. Also, I think it is foolish to decieve ourselves into thinking that IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL that an Indian Girl was doing the sort of things she was doing on the Web. Come to think of it, how many Indian Girls, even good ol' American Girls, could even come close to the presence she exuded on the Internet? The fact that she remained so steadfast in persuing her modeling career should be an ackkowledgement of the persistent, strong personality that she was. As she mentioned, she was a doer in life, and was not one to let life pass her by. I dare say, that Angela introduced in a thundering way the beauty of Indian Girls to many a man who otherwise may never have noticed. Lastly, in a very sad irony, the fact that she allegedly left us in such a tragic manner only adds to the intrigue of one Ms. Dhingra. Whether hard bits and bytes can be gathered is one thing, but regardless, to delete her page is to run an afront to many a man scattered throught this planet and the feelings she evoked in them. I believe these emotions are to be accredited to the significance that Angela was and will continue to be. If for no other reason, this page should be kept for those in the future who will have discovered the beauty and wonder of Angela. I conjecture that these people would first consult Wikipedia in their quest to learn more about Angela. To not have this page, is to leave future people rare the place with which to discuss and understand who one Angela Dhingra was and the unique flavor that was her life. P.S. I know this was long, but I'm obviously a big fan of hers ... and before her page is deleted, well, I guess I was going to say a few words on her behalf, if for no other reason, than for the honor of her memory. RIP Angela, we miss you!!Ontheoffwing (talk) 07:34, 4 September 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.