Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charlotte Stokely (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.  Sandstein  15:48, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Charlotte Stokely
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A BLP that lacks sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail. Sigificant RS coverage not found. The article is cited to online directories, industry publicity materials, and other sources otherwise not suitable for notability. Does not meet WP:PORNBIO / WP:NACTOR. No significant awards or notable contributions to the genre. Mainstream roles are minor or uncredited.

The first AfD closed as "no consensus" in 2015; the arguments for keeping were not compelling. Two years on, it's a good time to revisit. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:45, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:39, 26 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - Unfortunately we can't keep based on looks #sadface, Sorry back on topic, I've found these 2 but in terms of reliable sources that's pretty much it, Barely nothing reliable-source wise on Google and the article is IMHO very poor, Fails PORNBIO and most certainly fails GNG. – Davey 2010 Talk 21:34, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete the above comment illustrates why people continue to argue that Wikipedia continues to have major issues with adequate inclusion of women in creating the project. This bizarre over creating of exceisvely high number of articles on pornographic film actresses with nothing even approaching showing of adequate coverage is one of the worst our of control misuses of Wikipedia. The other is our excessive over abundance of articles on sports figures.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:10, 3 July 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.