Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jodi West


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 01:32, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Jodi West

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:GNG and WP:PORNBIO, two nominees are not enough. In my WP:BEFORE I just found a number of false positives, but nothing of substance. Deprodded with the rationale that she passes GNG and PORNBIO as a producer, but I couldn't find any evidence of that. Cavarrone 22:35, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as no evidence of notability, Fails GNG. – Davey 2010 Talk 22:39, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep I made this go to AfD and I moved it into mainspace (I didn't however write any of the article). I'm not sure how you couldn't find any evidence (how?!) - it's pretty clear even on the official website who's the owner [www.forbiddenfruitsfilms.com] since Jodi is plastered all over it and the main menu points a link to her personal site too. Also they must have a good amount of films since a quick search for their DVD's results in hundreds of results . This took me about a minute to find, my point being this isn't some really obscure studio. I'm not sure why all those references are not suitable either, a quick google result resulted in 21 000 000 results, all of the links on the first couple of pages relating to her Abcmaxx (talk) 22:45, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Notability is established by reliable sources independent of the subject. Sites affiliated with the subject don't count. A raw number of Google hits does not establish notability. That goes double for pornography where flooding is common. Finally, the only citation to significant coverage (an AVN article) appears to be a regurgitated press release. AVN is notorious for this. • Gene93k (talk) 02:02, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Internet Adult Film Database, Adult Film Database, Internet Movie Database and AVN (magazine) are all independent reliable sources surely? Abcmaxx (talk) 13:26, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Databases like IMDb and IAFD do not establish notability. IMDb is not a reliable source for biographical information. IAFD lacks biographical depth. Porn trade press like Adult Video News must be treated with caution. If the articles are not reprinted press releases (like the one cited in the article), they tend to promote the industry. • Gene93k (talk) 14:00, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:43, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:PORNBIO without award wins. Fails WP:GNG without nontrivial coverage by multiple reliable sources. All I could find was a single article at Adult Video News. Even that article may be questionable. • Gene93k (talk) 02:18, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * More sources I'm not sure if I'm missing something but I found 3 articles/interviews from independent sources very easily. XCritic Adult DVD talk, Xbiz  and Fleshbot . All three websites look legit, and granted they're all publications that are online and related to the subject, but there aren't going to be many articles in a main newspaper now are they, especially as most sites are just tube sites which will want to point you straight to the video content. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:40, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Found even more. Hotmovies.co.uk, womeninadult.co.uk , Interview with headlines.xxx , arentwenaughtyxxx.com ... "I couldn't find anything" argument is very weak one Abcmaxx (talk) 17:22, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete I'm afraid that Abcmaxx hasn't identified any reliable sources for notability. The only one close is Xbiz and this seems to have a fake byline and is, in any event, and interview and therefore primary not secondary. I wouldn't like to hang a BLP on such a weak source and the subject fails GNG/PORNBIO. Spartaz Humbug! 17:39, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom's rationale and per Gene93k's sound and accurate analysis. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 22:15, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per Gene93k. Pax 07:24, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Subject meets neither the WP:GNG nor the low-hanging fruit that is WP:PORNBIO. Tarc (talk) 15:47, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:PORNBIO and WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:04, 3 March 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.