Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyoko Ayana


 * 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 Keep The evidence presented by Japanese sources clearly turned the tide of the discussion to favor retention in this case. Xoloz 16:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Kyoko Ayana
Not notable. Would not meet the proposed WP:PORN BIO or a Japanese equivalent (notable awards and magazines, mainstream work, etc etc.) Delete. --- Hong Qi Gong 23:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom unless she's been in a hundred movies or more. Someone who knows japanese may be able to better help though. --Daniel Olsen 23:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions.   -- Neier 21:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Daniel. Now we just need someone who speaks Japanese.  Srose   (talk)  21:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Changed to keep per results gathered by Japanese-speakers. :)  Srose  (talk)  13:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep -- over a million Ghits (Japanese), and to counter systemic bias. Neier 21:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment When I clicked on that link, it counted 769,000 hits.  Are we even sure all of them refer to the same person?  Besides, Google hits is not an accurate way to establish the notability of porn stars.  See WP:PORN_BIO.  --- Hong Qi Gong 21:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep -- 1,010,000 Google hits and not notable? Nominator acted in bad faith by previously deleting List of Japanese female porn stars on the grounds that it duplicated a category, even though most of the names listed had no article (and probably did not need one, hence the list). Nominator is now systematically deleting every article in that category. Nominator routinely deletes Japanese articles by dishonestly applying English language tests. Nominator's edits at articles like Asian fetish and Sex crimes against Asian women in the United States show he is aggressively promoting a POV of Asian women as asexual, helpless victims. User is censoring Wikipedia of articles about Asian models out of some bizarre form of racist prudery. Kyoko Ayana is most certainly notable. Dekkappai 22:12, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - Please assume good faith. What other articles I may or may not edit is irrelevant to the fact that this person is most certainly not notable.  1) Google hits has been determined to be an innaccurate way to determine notability for porn actors/actresses.  2) I specifically mentioned that she would not be notable for a Japanese equivalent of WP:PORN BIO.  There's no notable mainstream work, no notable magazine appearances, no notable awards, etc etc.  There are Japanese porn actresses that are notable enough, but this particular one is not.  --- Hong Qi Gong 00:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Vsion 02:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, popular model. Kappa 04:08, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, the article is a stub - more chance should be given for it to establish notability. Xuanwu 08:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Amazon.jp lists 117 DVDs, 46 videos, and 10 books when her name is searched. Neier 10:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, 1,010,000 google hits probably determines notability. I didn't know of her until this AFD debate. Shows what you learn from Wikipedia! --TheM62Manchester 10:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Repeating Neier's comment, for the hard-of-hearing: Amazon.jp lists 117 DVDs, 46 videos, and 10 books when her name is searched. See: "彩名杏子". Notability has been established. Amazing what you can find if you actually look around rather than delete an article simply because you've never heard of it, and don't approve of the subject. Again: There is absolutely no valid reason to delete the article. Dekkappai 14:35, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - in as much as I am offended by Dekkappai's tone, the subject does appear to meet the proposed WP:PORN BIO. Other editors may wish to strictly address the discussion in this context, rather than making up reasons like "popular model" which have no bearing on the issue, or using Google hits which WP:PORN BIO specifically discredits.  Tychocat 14:56, 26 August 2006 (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.