Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexandra Quinn (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 keep. Consensus is that the subject qualifies for inclusion under general notability guideline, and is not specifically excluded by WP:NOT in meeting the conditions of WP:BLP1E. S warm  ♠  19:52, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Alexandra Quinn
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Previous afd closed as no consensus but this is a clear case of someone who fails PORNBIO being notable only for doing underaged porn. Given that the sources only discuss her in that context it's a clear BLP1e and quite harmful. Spartaz Humbug! 20:17, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:23, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:25, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:25, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:25, 14 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete no where near notable for roles in pornography.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:25, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep: She might not meet PORNBIO, but she definitely meets the GNG. Beyond that, the nom's suggestion that sources stating she did underage porn are harmful to the subject is a serious misunderstanding of BLP, which doesn't at all require that we say nothing that might disparage a living subject.  It just requires that disparaging statements be linked to high-quality sources.   Nha Trang  Allons! 13:20, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep: meet of PORNBIO and GNG. Subtropical -man   talk   (en-2)   15:50, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * How does this performer pass PORNBIO? Only award win is scene-related and does not count. • Gene93k (talk) 19:43, 15 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. A porn star known mainly for one event, getting caught working under age. Fails PORNBIO per my comments above. RS coverage since the 1991 incident appears to be passing mentions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - She passes the general notability guidelines and not as BLP1E. In addition to the underage controversy, she was featured in the book about the murder of Christopher Walsh, Nobody Walks, as the girlfriend of one of the murderers. A chapter is also devoted to her devirginising a fan as part of a publicity stunt in in Embedded. Morbidthoughts (talk) 03:15, 17 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep per Morbidthoughts. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - WP:BLP1E for the underage controversy; mentions in a book are trivial. Tarc (talk) 12:41, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * No, this is in not trivial and Quinn is not a "low-profile individual" to satisfy WP:BLP1E. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:30, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * My tack on BLP1E is a bit more conservative; if the subject would be otherwise unknown save for the event, then deletion is warranted. As for the book, non-notable title, non-notable author put put out by a middling true crime publisher is not what I call a stellar source. Tarc (talk) 18:55, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Macmillan is not a middling publisher by any standard. Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thomas Dunne, a small subsidiary thereof, is. Tarc (talk) 04:06, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisted as per discussion at Deletion review/Log/2015 July 22.  Sandstein  10:33, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. I hesitated between keep and delete but Morbidthoughts arguments swayed me to a weak keep. -- fdewaele, 19 July 2015, 13:13.
 * Keep per MorbidThoughts - She's been mentioned in a few books and the underage controversy looks adequately sourced so seems better to Keep imho. – Davey 2010 Talk 22:10, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:33, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:GNG and is not a WP:BLP1E. Aside from the coverage on the discovery of her underage performances in adult films, there is also coverage of her stripping career during her hiatus from porn. The article is titled "Topless dancer says she was fired for not letting patrons touch her" and was published by The Commercial Appeal on October 30, 1993. By the way, this and most of the other sources used in the article that aren't online can be found at newslibrary.com. The "Porn industry torching tapes that starred underage actress" article published by The Hollywood Reporter on November 1, 1991 can be found here. Rebecca1990 (talk) 14:53, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, as per comments by and .  Onel 5969  TT me 22:26, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. No one argues that the subject satisfies PORNBIO or any other SNG. One of the two book sources cited by MT is clearly not a reliable source; it carries a disclaimer from its author saying that " "This book is a memoir. It reflects the author’s present recollections of his experiences over a period of years. Some names and characteristics have been changed. Some characters have been combined, events have been compressed, and certain episodes are re-created and not meant to portray actual events". It also contains virtually no factual content regarding Quinn. "Rebecca's" citation of a single, brief local news story constitutes, per a newsbank search, constitutes the entirety of the news coverage of her "stripping career". What we are left with is the claim that an otherwise non-notable porn performer is made notable because she is mentioned as a witness in a "true crime" book about a non-notable murder. We have never, to my knowledge, determined that conjoining non-substantial coverage in two entirely discrete areas satisfies the "significant coverage" requirement of the GNG. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 22:52, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep (changed from comment) For those who want to judge for themselves, here is a copy of Nobody Walks (she is mentioned about 25 times throughout the book, 5 times as Alexandra Quinn, and about twenty times as Diane Stewart). Then there is a mention in Exposure: A Sociologist Explores Sex, Society, and Adult Entertainment by Dr. Chauntelle Tibbals. And a mention in American Gangbang: A Love Story by Sam Benjamin (pp. 39 and 103). And in The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America: An Encyclopedia edited by Wilbur R. Miller (p. 1399). And in True Crime: Timeless Classics by Ryan White [with portrait]. Kraxler (talk) 13:24, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Reading again one of the sources, I discover now that the underage-porn case had actually lasting impact. I quote from the abovementioned encyclopedia: [After the Lords and Quinn cases] "Popular media reported on the threat and spread of child pornography, largely on the Internet. ...the federal government responded. This led to the passage of 1995 laws that required producers of any pornographic images to keep evidence of the age of all participants. The 1996 Communications Decency Act was passed...". That alone takes it clearly beyond the restrictions of WP:BLP1E. Kraxler (talk) 14:32, 8 August 2015 (UTC)


 * 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.