Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Keira Nicole: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:32, 10 August 2016 editK.e.coffman (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers98,335 edits can change← Previous edit Revision as of 15:40, 10 August 2016 edit undoK.e.coffman (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers98,335 edits addNext edit →
Line 19: Line 19:
*'''Delete''' as nothing at all close for the substance of independent notability. ] ] 22:50, 8 August 2016 (UTC) *'''Delete''' as nothing at all close for the substance of independent notability. ] ] 22:50, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''. All delete votes above are either claiming that Nicole fails ], even though she undeniably passes it ("Has won a well-known and significant industry award"), or asking that the article be deleted because she fails GNG, which doesn't matter. ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]. ] (]) 15:25, 10 August 2016 (UTC) *'''Comment'''. All delete votes above are either claiming that Nicole fails ], even though she undeniably passes it ("Has won a well-known and significant industry award"), or asking that the article be deleted because she fails GNG, which doesn't matter. ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]. ] (]) 15:25, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
**] may apply. ] (]) 15:32, 10 August 2016 (UTC) **] may apply. As part of AfD, each article is evaluated on its own merits, I believe. ] (]) 15:32, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:40, 10 August 2016

Keira Nicole

Keira Nicole (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 PORNBIO and the GNG. No qualifying awards, just nominations. No independent reliable sourcing. No non-trivial biographical content. "Best Actress—Couples-Themed Release" is a recently created, little-noted award category with no discernible selection criteria; in fact. "Couples-Themed Release" is an arbitrary/meaningless category -- the term gets no GBooks hits, and virtually all, if not all, the Ghits relate to this or related award categories, not do any topic with independent meaning. Even if this were to get a technical, tenuous PORNBIO pass, that is outweighed by the utter failure to even remotely approach meeting the GNG. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 13:13, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:21, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:22, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:22, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
What is the coverage that demonstrates the subject's notability? An awards confers some measure of presumed notability, but the actual notability still needs to be demonstrated via significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, as per WP:GNG. K.e.coffman (talk) 09:20, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Categories: