Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dani Woodward


 * 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. North America1000 00:17, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Dani Woodward

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails PORNBIO & GNG - scene awards no longer count Spartaz Humbug! 12:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - winner of the award, meets of WP:PORNBIO/Wikipedia:Notability (people). Also, notable because: 11x interwiki and many nominations to awards. Also, good quality article, not stub. Notable. Subtropical -man   talk   (en-2)   11:51, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note to closer; every one of this user's rationales to keep fails to meet the project's guidelines, policies or norms for notability;
 * Scene awards wins is a deprecated criteria of WP:PORNBIO.
 * The subject fails to meet WP:N, as the sources in the article are press releases, nomination announcements, and mentions in non -RS.
 * The number of interwiki links has never been a criteria for notability in this project.
 * Multiple nominations for porn awards is a deprecated criteria of WP:PORNBIO.
 * The quality of the writing is not a criteria for notability in this project.
 * Tarc (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The world and Wikipedia is not black and white, this is not binary code: 0 or 1, we are humans, not robots. Even if some argument fails to meet of PORNBIO, total rate based on many smaller arguments like as multiple nominations, number of interwiki, quality of the article, scene awards wins etc is keep. Subtropical -man   talk   (en-2)   16:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You have the right to make any argument you wish in an xfD...being wrong isn't a crime...but any other editor has the right to rebut your argument if they feel it is bad. I am simply pointing out that the entirety of your argument to retain this article is only supported by your personal opinion and not based in project policy or guideline. Tarc (talk) 17:12, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:51, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:53, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:53, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Subject does not meet WP:PORNBIO, as multiple noms and scene ward wins are deprecated criteria. Subject is not covered in-depths by multiple reliable sources, thus failing WP:N. Tarc (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:PORNBIO as multiple noms and scene award wins no longer count. No in-depth coverage by  reliable sources. Finnegas (talk) 15:16, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - - You may aswell give up - You'd get more sense speaking to a brickwall!, Anyway as gorgeous as she is looks don't count towards notability, As noted above fails PORNBIO & GNG. – Davey 2010 Talk 04:52, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clearly fails PORNBIO, no plausible arguments supporting claim of notability under the GNG. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 16:53, 26 August 2015 (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.