Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anissa Kate


 * 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. Those supporting deleting have refuted the points raised by those supporting keeping the article. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 04:54, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Anissa Kate

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Single RS therefore fails GNG and ENT Spartaz Humbug! 18:52, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:38, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:39, 21 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. First of all, that's not true. Second, even if it were true, neither WP:ENT nor WP:GNG state this requirement; in fact, GNG explicity states: "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected." And multiple sources indeed exist (and if anyone tries to argue that some of the sources aren't independent because they're pornography-related, remember that pornography is a category, not the subject; Anissa Kate herself is the subject).  Erpert  blah, blah, blah... 20:48, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. I added some references. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 21:11, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. She's won multiple AVN awards.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 12:04, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources added by Eastmain and reasoning provided by Espert --DannyS712 (talk) 19:34, 23 June 2019 (UTC) Delete per below --DannyS712 (talk) 21:46, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. She has repeatedly won major awards in the industry. Westmanurbe (talk) 15:35, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete sourcing does not meet GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:21, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Question: Why sourcing doesn't meet GNG? Westmanurbe (talk) 16:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The award wins and nominations (citations 7 thru 17) don't count as non-trivial coverage, and since PORNBIO has been deprecated, they are fluff. Interviews don't count as secondary sources.  The only citation that plausibly looks like non-trivial secondary source coverage is Les Inrockuptibles.  Not enough to establish notability by itself.  Even here, if the Big Bad Wolfowitz challenges its reliability, I would defer their superior perception of churnalism and tabloid fluff. • Gene93k (talk)
 * Everyone talks about PORNBIO and its deprecation. What was about? I imagine it established that an adult performer who had won an award should be considered automatically relevant. However, I doubt that its deprecation automatically implies the irrelevance of all Awards and of all Awards winners Westmanurbe (talk) 22:37, 28 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. No independent, reliable, third-party sourcing. The above !votes which cite porn industry awards as a basis for notability are contrary to the established consensus that such awards fail the well-known/significant standard. The references (other than the award announcements, which are not independent third-party sources) are advertising pages and clickbait, without any shred of the reputation for accuracy and fact-checking needed to establish notability for a BLP. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo).  Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006.   (talk) 15:53, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * During a previous AFD you've wrote that my argument (about the relevance of some Awards like "best performer of the Year" according ANYBIO) has repeatedly been rejected by consensus. Niche or specialized awards like "Girl-Girl Performer of the Year" and "BBW Performer of the Year" or the equivalent have been found to fail the "well-known/significant" standard. I agree about the lack of relevance of awards like "BBW Performer of the Year", but what about an award like "Best performer of the Year" or "Best Foreign Performer of the Year" (not everyone is lucky enough to be born in the United States)? Westmanurbe (talk) 22:16, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. Fails WP:BASIC with insufficient coverage by independent secondary sources.  Porn awards are not sufficient to satisfy WP:ENT. Also see my and Wolfowitz's comments above about the low quality of the references. • Gene93k (talk) 21:11, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ST47 (talk) 01:14, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Reply to two questions above - WP:PORNBIO was deprecated by editor consensus here in March 2019.  Winning a porn award without coverage by independent reliable sources is no longer considered a predictor of notability.  The old rationale behind PORNBIO was that porn was of general interest despite being shunned by reliable sources.  I used to subscribe that belief too.  However editors realized that exempting porn from established reliable source requirements is bad policy.  As for award categories, Best Performer and Best Foreign Performer (and even AVN Hall of Fame) suffer from the same problem as Girl-Girl Performer or Best BBW: winning the award generally does not attract non-trivial coverage by independent reliable sources.  Even before PORNBIO was taken down, performers who met the letter of the SNG were deleted for lacking good sources (e.g. Janet Jacme). • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
 * What he said.
 * Without disagreeing in any respect with Gene93k's comment, I'd add that adult industry awards generally are viewed as failing the "significant" standard in guidelines like ANYBIO, om mo small part because the awardgivers are not seen as sufficiently independent from the recipients. The AVN Awards and nominations are widely criticized, particularly within the industry, as payback to the magazine's advertisers. XBIZ Awards are given by a PR business, which actively touted the fact that nominations for its awards are controlled by its clients. An award often described as the most prominent porn industry award in the UK folded not long after giving awards to videos that were never released and guaranteeing award wins to nominees who spent enough money on VIP ticket packages to the award ceremony.The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo).  Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006.   (talk) 03:52, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
 * In short, what you say is: earning an award is not considered as proof of notability, because 1.Adult industry Awards don't attract coverage by independent and reliable sources; 2.Awards are organized by private companies, which assign them to their customers based on the amounts they are willing to spend on advertising, or in PR fees. Regarding the first point, I googled "Avn awards", and I've found (after Wikipedia articles about them) citations in Tgcom.24 (a major information site in Italy), Showtime, il Messaggero (the most important local newspaper in Rome) Pitchfork. After googling, in Italian, "Oscar del porno", I found a series of articles in which Avn were qualified (perhaps a little superficially) as the "Oscars of porn" . About the second point, leaving aside the fact that it would be better to provide certain elements for these accusations, it should not be forgotten that the article relates to a performer who does not pay advertisements or PR. Even assuming that the accusations are true, I would understand if the organizers favored one company's movies instead of those of another, not individual performers, who can also work for different productions and (personal opinion) don't have so much money to buy awards. Westmanurbe (talk) 05:49, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Anyway, I typed "Anissa Kate" on google news, and I found an article on GQ France In which it is reported that Anissa Kate was the third actress most sought-after by French on a well-known site of pornographic subject (proof of a certain notoriety at least in the country of origin). Some sites list her among the adult actresses for adults of Arab origini. Plus at least two articles in Spanish about Avn Awards winners for 2019  in which Kate is obviously mentioned. I left out photo galleries and news that could be classified as gossip Westmanurbe (talk) 06:58, 29 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete: sources do not meet WP:ENT / WP:BASIC. For example, refs added here: diff are tabloid trivia. GQ France is a passing mention. Etc. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:15, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - Sources in the article are extremely poor and those online are even worse - The majority are mentions or are "So and so thinks Anissa is cute" .... If we rated notability on looks this would be an easy keep ... but unfortunately we don't. – Davey 2010 Talk 20:35, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   07:19, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not sure why the discussion is still open. MaskedSinger (talk) 12:20, 8 July 2019 (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.