Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Breann McGregor (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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:36, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Breann McGregor
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A BLP that lacks sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail. Does not meet WP:NMODEL and significant RS coverage not found. Cyber Girl of the Year honour is not significant and well known; the article on the program has been deleted here: Articles for deletion/Playboy Cyber Club (2nd nomination). The first AfD closed as "Procedural keep" due to the topic ban of the nominator. Seven year on, and with the program article deleted, I believe it's a good time to revisit. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:46, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 05:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 05:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:20, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:20, 24 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete as non notable porn actress, Hasn't won any notable/significant awards, Fails PORNBIO & GNG. – Davey 2010 Talk 17:31, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete This is the exact type of article, one on someone who has received virtually no reliable source coverage but whose career is liked by a certain segment of the masculinist movement and hated by a large swath of feminists, that gets Wikipedia so much bad press. Even back in 2011 when Wikipedia had more open inclusion rules no one argued the article should be kept on merit. The keeping of this article back then was a victory for mindless bureacracy, which in the assessment of some is another cause of the over abundance of male and under abundance of female editors in Wikipedia. Women do not thrive as well as men within uncaring beauracracies. Everything about this article screams it needs to be deleted poste haste.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:09, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete does not pass WP:GNG or WP:PORNBIO, the mainstream film roles are very minor Atlantic306 (talk) 17:45, 30 January 2018 (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.