| Revision as of 18:53, 11 February 2015 editRebecca1990 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,967 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:11, 11 February 2015 edit undoРаціональне анархіст (talk | contribs)2,829 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| *'''Delete'''. Fails PORNBIO. Insufficient independent reliable sourcing to satisfy the GNG (references are either industry PR or likely kayfabe). ] (]) 16:42, 11 February 2015 (UTC) | *'''Delete'''. Fails PORNBIO. Insufficient independent reliable sourcing to satisfy the GNG (references are either industry PR or likely kayfabe). ] (]) 16:42, 11 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' Enough coverage in reliable sources like '']'', '']'', and '']'' to satisfy the ]. ] (]) 18:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' Enough coverage in reliable sources like '']'', '']'', and '']'' to satisfy the ]. ] (]) 18:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ::The trade press are not independent RS. Discounting industry promotion, the single Cosmopolitan piece is not "enough" independent RS to satisfy GNG.] 19:10, 11 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:11, 11 February 2015
Shane Diesel
- Shane Diesel (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)
I think this article subject doesn't pass the pornstar biography guideline without any award wins. Whether he passes GNG or not is a little less obvious. The article uses mostly press releases and such from avn and xbiz. Any thoughts? Macreep (talk) 20:44, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 21:30, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (note) @ 20:27, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Comment : Misplaced Pages a little slow these days? lol Macreep (talk) 22:02, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
- Keep - I believe he passes the GNG. Multiple articles from both AVN and XBIZ plus the feature in Cosmo. Morbidthoughts (talk) 01:08, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. Fails PORNBIO, and fluffing by the promotional trade press does not establish notability per GNG. Pax 07:35, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. Fails PORNBIO. Insufficient independent reliable sourcing to satisfy the GNG (references are either industry PR or likely kayfabe). The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 16:42, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Enough coverage in reliable sources like AVN, XBIZ, and Cosmopolitan to satisfy the WP:GNG. Rebecca1990 (talk) 18:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
- The trade press are not independent RS. Discounting industry promotion, the single Cosmopolitan piece is not "enough" independent RS to satisfy GNG. Pax 19:10, 11 February 2015 (UTC)