Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andi Land (2nd 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.  Wifione  Message 07:42, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Andi Land
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Since the last AfD, article still reliant on non-reliable or primary sourcing. Her Freeones award is not well known or significant enough to pass PORNBIO. Morbidthoughts (talk) 05:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC) Morbidthoughts (talk) 05:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

'''I am sorry, this is probably not the place to add my response, but it is a nightmare navigating through this site. I can't find anywhere to add a response to defend the article I have added, I click on links that go nowhere. PORNBIO is quoted but can I find it. It does not appear with a search. I am very frustrated.'''

I had hoped all my hard work finding many new sources, references, awards, appearances etc would be enough to satisfy everyone, obviously not. I can find links to show she won Gallery's Girl Next Door monthly award twice, (http://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=711325&highlight=gallery+magazine) and (http://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=690181&page=1) but GFY.com links are not admissible here. On the magazine covers themselves it does not mention anything, so they would be no use. I suppose I could buy those issues and scan the contents? She did win the awards, but I cannot find a link allowable on Wikipedia. The sentence stating she is the only person running the site wholly by herself and having her own affiliate program is difficult to justify, except that it is true. I can show that other models don't if anyone wants to dispute it, throw me some names. As an example, if you visit Ariel Rebel's article on this site, it mentions she hopes to have her own affiliate program soon. She has been hoping to do that for nearly five years! Freeones are not sufficient enough of an award. It is the only fan-voted award available, and it did attract 288,000 votes. It is near impossible for some models to win some of the awards deemed worthy to allow an article to appear here. Nearly all the awards are for LA-based models, signed up to studios in that city, where those same studios nominate their own models every time. I want to point out that if you are going to allow just some adult models to have an article here, it should be an even playing field, more categories to allow the ones that don't appear in hundreds of videos, go to all the LA award shows, appear on Howard Stern or visit Hugh Hefner at weekends. 86.2.147.96 (talk) 10:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No, you got the right place. What is so hard to navigate here? Which links are going nowhere for you? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:00, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I see a link saying 'talk', expecting that to take me to the correct page, but it is a Wikipedia page. Then I try Contribs. There should be a box called Reply that you go to! Grabags (talk) 15:39, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The relevant criteria for this article will likely be PORNBIO, although I don't know if NMODEL will help out at all in this case either. The Gallery's Girl Next Door monthly awards aren't gonna help the article very much.
 * I have been told Gallery magazine was the third best selling 'skin' magazine at that time, behind Playboy and Penthouse, possibly one million copies per issue worldwide? Also, I cannot find another model that won the monthly competition twice (although it is difficult to research), which PORNBIO qualifies her as "beginning a trend in pornography", something all the other girls could now aim for!. Grabags (talk) 15:39, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * "Also, I cannot find another model that won the monthly competition twice" Are you talking about the monthly "amateur" contest that Gallery used to have or simply that this model was a centerfold in Gallery magazine more than once? My understanding is that Gallery magazine went belly up a few years back, and, from my foggy memory, I'm pretty sure that more than one person won the monthly Gallery "amateur" contest. In any event, I've yet to see an acceptable citation that actually documents that she "won" (it's not really an "award" per se anyways) anything in that particular magazine, whether they are still around or not. Guy1890 (talk) 00:23, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Until recently, I had never heard of Gallery magazine, but I am told that 20-50 models were nominated/competed each month for the Girl Next Door contest. There are definitely many winners that went on to appear in Playboy and Penthouse. Votes were sent in and the one with the most votes won and gained a $2,500 prize (although they didn't in most cases – it was never paid out from 2006 to bankruptcy, allegedly). Since its takeover a few years back, the magazine now offer a devalued monthly prize of $500, and $500 for the Year award. It appears it once probably was third in line after Playmate of the month and Penhouse Pet of the month. Melissa Harrington has replied to me that she got her $25k prize for being Girl Next Door of the Year 2005. The only way I can find out who won each monthly Gallery prize is if someone has a copy, looks inside and tells me the winner, but I cannot source over 400 copies and prove the statement, that is why I did not add she is the only model to have won it twice to her article. A photographer had most copies from this century and was kind enough to go through them to note the winners, but he ends at 2004. And I am very unlikely to do that research, when it matters not to Wikipedia that she appeared in that magazine, that if it did not appear in Playboy, it does not count. Grabags (talk) 09:15, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I am aware of how the "Girl Next Door of the Month" contest worked. As for "There are definitely many winners that went on to appear in Playboy and Penthouse", that doesn't appear to apply to this model, and, if it did, that would add to her notability a tad. Guy1890 (talk) 20:09, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * "I can show that other models don't if anyone wants to dispute it, throw me some names." That's not going to help your case any either. What are the "2011 Best Newcomer", "2011 Best Adult Model", "2012 Best Adult Model", and "2013 Best OCSM" nominations all about? Are those just more Freeones' awards? Guy1890 (talk) 01:15, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is impossible to justify my remark. But it is PORNBIO groundbreaking, to allow the article to stay on Wikipedia. I have contacted lots that may be able to say this, but all of them that replied that their webmaster or partner edits the videos, they outsource photo editing, someone runs the website, organises the shoots etc, even replies to Twitter comments. Every independent female and male, running their own website who replied said they did not do the lot, run the whole show themselves. Although not all did respond or thought I was a looney. Yes, they are Freeones categories. Grabags (talk) 15:39, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but none of the immediate above sounds like it is going to help this article out at all. Guy1890 (talk) 00:23, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:03, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

'''Can someone explain what GNG is? And what defines substantial, independently-published coverage, please?''' 86.2.147.96 (talk) 17:07, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * You'll see GNG mentioned occasionally in these kind of AfDs, though it really seems to me that the above-mentioned PORNBIO is what really matters in many of these cases. See also: Identifying_reliable_sources. Guy1890 (talk) 20:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your continued help to allow me to navigate around Wikipedia. Even though three here have posted 'delete', I consider this article meets all the criteria required with what I've read: hugely successful websites, media appearances, awards, nominations, a career spanning nine years so far, and many magazine articles. If it had said 'appeared in Playboy' it would not have been nominated, which is silly. The adult information section is really lacking on this site, so hopefully this is the first of many that pass the rigorous examination. Thanks again. Grabags (talk) 07:47, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you're unfortunately going to end up being disappointed at the outcome of this AfD. Actually, if this model had only "appeared in Playboy", that might only entitle her to be on a List of Playboy Playmates of the Month, since just being a Playboy centerfold is not especially notable due to some kind of past practice here on Wikipedia. You might be able to make a PORNBIO "Has been featured multiple times in notable mainstream media" argument if you had better (or more) documentation of notable mainstream media appearances. The Webdreams thing might apply, but that's only one source, and, in general, I think that YouTube citation links aren't generally going to get it done when it comes to "valid" citations. This model's Gallery magazine appearances don't appear to be especially well sourced as well, but I'm not even sure that it would matter in the end, since, like it or not, I haven't seen any adult models end up with Wikipedia articles solely based on appearances in that (or Swank) magazine. You'll likely be better off just userfying this article (the administrator that closes this AfD could do that for you if you wanted) and seeing if this model does some things in the future that better meet PORNBIO, like maybe winning or being nominated for some more "well-known" or "significant industry awards". Good luck... Guy1890 (talk) 20:55, 26 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Fails GNG; subject is not the object of substantial coverage in multiple instances of independently-published coverage in so-called reliable sources, nor entitled to "low bar" consideration for having won a major industry individual award. Carrite (talk) 15:48, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and per Carrite. Promotional gimmickry does nothing to establish genuine notability. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 17:02, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Finnegas (talk) 17:38, 22 June 2013 (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.