Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tsubasa Amami


 * 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. Jenks24 (talk) 10:36, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Tsubasa Amami

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A biography of a living person that lacks reliable sources that discuss the topic directly and in detail. Sources provided are unsuitable for notability and include directory listings and primary sources.

The ja.wiki article is equally unconvincing for notability, primarily consisting of non notable filmography and including trivia such as the subject's "hobby is playing with pets".

The appearance in a band is not indicative of notability. Per linked article (Ebisu Muscats), there are currently 29 members of the musical ensemble, and 45 past members. The other band is non notable.

I am also nominating the following related page because it's similar in content and scope; the subject is member of the two bands in question; ja.wiki article is likewise not indicative of notability.

Both articles were recently created by Special:Contributions/Gstree.

K.e.coffman (talk) 22:53, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:15, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:15, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:15, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:18, 27 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete both. While I usually don't approve of bundled nominations for porn stars, these two come from the same mass production run of poorly sourced articles for winners of the same non-notable award. Anything that looks even remotely reliable consists of trivial mentions. Remaining sources are the usual film databases, vendors and the award's site along with porn-following tabloid. Fails PORNBIO and GNG. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * delete We don't keep BLPs with crappy sources and the assertion is that the award is some inhouse effort. Spartaz Humbug! 06:38, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete One reliable source documenting a porn award which confers some notability, but nothing else. Search tools yield nothing reliable or dedicated. Out with it. Tapered (talk) 08:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep: She's part of the jpop band Sexy-J.


 * Delete both. Gene93k's analysis hits the nail on the head. The argument that being a member of a marginally notable at best, bargain-basement-porn-knockoff of the Pussycat Dolls is enough to demonstrate notability fails miserably. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006.   (talk) 15:31, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Insufficient indicia of notability. Montanabw (talk) 08:39, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - non-notable adult film actress. CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   12:26, 5 March 2017 (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.