- 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. No evidence presented of meeting WP:GNG nor WP:PORNBIO j⚛e deckertalk 03:09, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Crystal Ray (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:PORNBIO because her award is a group scene award. Fails the general notability guidelines also. Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:17, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Fails GNG as the 3 sources listed are considered unreliable. Electriccatfish2 (talk) 23:21, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:44, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:45, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Fails GNG without non-trivial reliable source coverage. Single Best New Starlet nomination is not sufficient to pass WP:PORNBIO. Scene award and nomination don't count. • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Per nomination. IMDB etc are not WP:RS. THey are crowd sourced like wikipedia. Thus WP:N has not been demonstrated adequately. BO | Talk 07:00, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - lacks WP:RS. The refs in the article are not good enough to make the article pass WP:GNG. →TSU tp* 11:05, 4 July 2012 (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.