Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gina Ryder (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. j⚛e deckertalk 02:52, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Gina Ryder
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No claim of notability. Fails WP:PORNBIO as won no awards merely a single nomination. Fails WP:GNG as no independent, reliable sourcing. Finnegas (talk) 09:22, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - well known and also meets the requirements of WP:PORNBIO and WP:GNG. Subtropical -man   talk   (en-2)   15:50, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Could you please clarify how you believe this article is notable? Finnegas (talk) 17:54, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:36, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:36, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Finnegas (talk) 07:22, 29 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. It's amazing that an article like this could have passed PORNBIO back in 2007. Fails any recent version of PORNBIO with just a single award nomination. Fails GNG. Zero reliable sources cited in article. Only passing mentions and routine announcements found in search. • Gene93k (talk) 17:51, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Internet Adult Film Database is reliable source. Also, I add Internet Movie Database source, also reliable. Subtropical -man   talk   (en-2)   18:15, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment IMDb can be used as an external link, but cannot be used as a reliable source. LADY LOTUS • TALK 20:02, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. "can be used as an external link", "but cannot be used as a reliable source" - nonsense. IMDb is reliable source, very useful as a source for date of birth, etc. Subtropical -man   talk   (en-2)   16:17, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment please see WP:Citing IMDb and IMDB/RS. Thanks. LADY LOTUS • TALK 17:30, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator's accurate analysis. Fails POENBIO criteria, no reliably sourced biographical content. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 11:06, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment This well-known performer SHOULD be a slam dunk keep, but because of the highly exclusionary requirements for adult performers to be deemed Wikipedia-worthy, this article has no chance of being kept in its current state. 209.90.140.72 (talk) 23:31, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Please explain the policy basis for arguing that a BLP without decent reliable sources should be a slam dunk keep. Spartaz Humbug! 21:19, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per above - No notable porno actress. →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  23:48, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete BLPs require better sourcing then this. Spartaz Humbug! 21:19, 30 May 2014 (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.