Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sara Jay (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. Favonian (talk) 12:31, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sara Jay

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

Fails WP:PORNBIO and WP:ENT, no indication the subject can satisfy the GNG or any other SNG. The "Urban X" award, by repeated consensus in AFD and DRV discussions, does not demonstrate notability. Most GNews/GBooks hits are clearly spurious, a small number refer to the unrelated musician known as Sara(h) Jay, associated with Massive Attack, and an even smaller number are PR/press releases/presskit pieces for the article subject. All citations in the article are promotional, mostly from the subject's own website, except the award announcement -- which, curiously enough, doesn't mention the article subject. Article has already been PROD-deleted once, AFD-deleted once, speedied three times, and protected against recreation -- but it's back, even though the logs say the protection was never lifted. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:20, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —• Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - From Wikipedia:Notability (people), section Pornbio criteria: "Has won a well-known award such as an AVN Award. (See Category:Pornographic film awards or Category:Film awards for other awards which may apply.)"... Well, Urban X Award is present in the first category. I think this guideline-section should be (re)written more clearly, saying explicitly which awards "pass the exam" and which are not. --Cavarrone (talk) 22:09, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Delete - Hullaballoo, can you show us where the Urban X award has been determined by consensus not to demonstrate notability? I looked through both previous AfDs and it was never mentioned, As it stands right now, as Cavarrone said, it seems like she passes WP:PORNBIO #1. I know the link in PORNBIO says "may apply," but unless consensus dictates that it not be considered "well-known", I fail to see why the Urban X award should be disregarded, particularly since it it is notable enough to have its own Wikipedia article. Further, I don't really think the previous AfDs are very applicable, since they were both dated from 2007, and she received the Urban X award in 2009, so it would seem that she became notable after both previous AfDs occurred. If you can show where consensus turned out against the inclusion of the Urban X under PORNBIO 1, I'll change my vote, but otherwise, I don't see any valid reason for this article to fail notability. Bstbll (talk) 06:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Examples from recent AFD/DRV discussions:

The DRV has the most detailed reasoning. The Kitten AFD (in 2009) was likely the one that first established that the award wasn't sufficient to establish notability, and it was initiated by one of the more active members of the relevant Wikiproject. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:01, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per those references, I've changed my vote to delete, as consensus clearly dictates that her award is not notable. Bstbll (talk) 15:19, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Simply not notable. Why, because she performs ""interracial" scenes"?Curb Chain (talk) 12:50, 12 June 2011 (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.