Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nina Loves Girls


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 22:48, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Nina Loves Girls

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable porn film. No evidence it passes WP:NFILMS. Cavarrone (talk) 22:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Cavarrone (talk) 22:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, run-of-the-mill porn product; references purported to support notability are just part of the industry's own marketing and as such not independent. No mainstream coverage in reliable sources. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:NFILMS. My search for reliable sources only got a passing mention in a press release. The references in the article are not reliable. • Gene93k (talk) 23:17, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. The faux "reviews" cited in the article as evidence of notability are just marketing hype by online vendors. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:45, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Did it ever occur to you that everything isn't "hype"?  Erpert  Who is this guy? 12:06, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In this case, Hullaballoo Wolfowitz has a valid point. The "reviews" cited come from sites that offer to sell the video. They are not credible for establishing notability. • Gene93k (talk) 12:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The customer reviews are; not the staff reviews. I never include customer reviews in articles I create.  Erpert  Who is this guy? 19:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the staff reviews cited by the article. The sites themselves are the problem. Vendor sites are not sufficiently independent of the subject to satisfy WP:NFILMS. • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete due to lack of notability. But I love the staff reviewer name of "J.D. Bauchery".--Milowent • hasspoken  05:39, 24 December 2011 (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.