Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sensi Pearl


 * 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. As Spartaz says, "appeared in" is not notability.  DGG ( talk ) 04:39, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Sensi Pearl

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

In adequately sourced BLP and fails PORNBIO as well. Film sourced from credits and what looks like a press release so that's not counting to notability either. Spartaz Humbug! 21:27, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. We can talk about the quality of the references, but she has appeared in three notable mainstream films, so I don't understand how one could imagine she fails WP:PORNBIO. --Sammy1339 (talk) 00:42, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * yes, let's talk about the references. Appeared in is not notability. What are the sources to show that she had staring roles? Bit parts that no one reports on don't count.Spartaz Humbug! 08:38, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * If you're saying that AVN is not a reliable source for information such as who appeared in what film, I think you're wrong. And by my reading of PORNBIO "starring" is not required - after all that would be a redundant criterion, as an actor who stars in multiple notable films is notable without that guideline. --Sammy1339 (talk) 14:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * By the way, after a little digging, this source: describes her role in About Cherry as "starring" and this source: mentions her roles in High School Musical 1 & 2 as well as a brief (one-line) appearance in Read it and Weep. --Sammy1339 (talk) 14:46, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * That's starring in the context of a review of the film not mentioning her at all except in a list of cast members? Therichest doesn't look like a reliable source and if your idea of building an encyclopedia is to source material in BLPs from an article entitled 7-disney-girls-who-went-wild then we really are up shit creek. Spartaz Humbug! 22:46, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I didn't say we should use that as a reference for the article. I'm confused about your objection here: are you disputing whether she actually appeared in the films or not? If not, then AVN is a perfectly good reliable source for non-contentious information of this kind. If so, I can provide further evidence. --Sammy1339 (talk) 22:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not disputing the fat she had a bit part but it should be given no weight because there appears to be absolutely zero critical or independant comment of her role in the film. Bit parts absolutrly don't count..... and regarding her 'role' in HSM I'm unable to find her name on the full cast list shown on IMBD., or HSM2 for thsat matter . Do we have any verifiable information on what role she played? Does she actually speak? Spartaz Humbug! 23:02, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * And the text from PORNBIO actually stares Has been featured multiple times in notable mainstream media Pleases explain how these bit parts = featured? According to dictionary.com Featured means"1.made a feature or highlight; given prominence: a featured article; a featured actor." bolding mine Spartaz Humbug! 23:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure she had a major role in About Cherry, I'm not sure about her role in About Cherry (I confused her character for another one) although I haven't seen the film (and don't want to.) As for HSM 1&2 and Read it and Weep, I assume she wasn't credited under her porn name, and I don't know how substantial her roles were in the former two. I'll find out. As for the guideline, the term "featured" is definitely not the same thing as "starring" - for example pancakes were featured in a Kevin Costner film, but did not have a starring role. IIRC, for the purposes of WP:PORNBIO it's conventional that anyone with a speaking role is "featured," but non-speaking roles don't count for this purpose. --Sammy1339 (talk) 23:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry but I'm not accepting that just speaking makes you featured. You will need to find me a consensus for that if you are going to rely on that argument. Spartaz Humbug! 08:18, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:18, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:19, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:19, 26 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 04:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:42, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete as not notable. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 03:18, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. The claimed mainstream roles fall well below the PORNBIO requirements, and all but one aren't even established by the cited sources. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 00:47, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete fails PORNBIO.LM2000 (talk) 02:48, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. It's not really helpful to just say "fails PORNBIO" or to assert that the roles are below PORNBIO requirements - what do you believe PORNBIO requires, and why do you believe the roles fall short of that? As for Wolfowitz's claim that only one role is established by the references - that's just not true. Take a closer look, they are all there. Unfortunately, while I tried to check the depth of the roles I couldn't find any information on that - it's not the sort of thing that is published about any actors; nobody counts how many lines everyone had and makes a table of statistics. Nevertheless she appeared in four mainstream films, and no argument has been advanced concerning how significant such roles have to be, nor has any evidence been provided that they didn't meet that hypothetical standard. --Sammy1339 (talk) 17:18, 13 November 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.