Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ariana (actress)


 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 05:19, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Ariana (actress)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Technical SNG passes are not enough for a BLP when the subject clearly fails GNG. Spartaz Humbug! 21:11, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 22:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 22:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 22:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 22:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete not enough sourcing to pass the general notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:21, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Solid Keep. She meets WP:PORNBIO ("The person has won a well-known and significant industry award"). You need to check the WP:BEFORE. These people do not often screen well on quality RS for GNG for obvious reasons, hence WP:PORNBIO. Britishfinance (talk) 02:16, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:29, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~SS49~   {talk}  04:48, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Don’t know how many times I have to say this but winning an award is not enough for an article. There are no independent, reliable sources here. No career to speak of as she retired over two decades ago. Trillfendi (talk) 05:08, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete A single listing on "some website". Not clear this is reliable at all or even affiliated with any official organization. A collection of roles from "some other website" apparently written and maintained by volunteers. So basically no more reliable than Wikipedia. A puff interview on "some website". What appears to be mostly badly written erotic fiction, just in case we need a citation for whether "Decker pronged her wet hole". It's not clear that any of these are at all useful for a BLP, and the name is so exceedingly generic that I'm finding plenty of sources about plenty of people, but none of it is about her. Winning an award doesn't mean we keep a poorly sourced flagrant BLP violation and pretend it's an encyclopedia article.  G M G  talk  13:00, 24 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete awful sourcing and a bunch of BLP violating details. Fails WP:ENT Legacypac (talk) 18:10, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:PORNBIO with her major industry award and WP:ENT #3, probably passes WP:NEXIST since was active sort of "pre-internet." SportingFlyer  T · C  05:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: a BLP that lacks sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail; fails WP:BASIC. --K.e.coffman (talk) 15:24, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as no evidence of any notability, Fails PORNBIO & GNG. – Davey 2010 Talk 22:55, 27 February 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.