Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vanessa Chase


 * 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. Please note that this close is not intended to set precedent in regards to BLP - most of the deletion comments refer to notability, not BLP concerns. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 02:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Vanessa Chase

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Unsourced. Original research. No assertion of notability under the applicable policy. Various claims violating BLP. While the Ginger Jolie AFD hasn't achieved a consensus, the discussion there shows a consensus that articles like this one should be deleted. The Enchantress Of Florence (talk) 15:20, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy close very pointy nomination, subject of this BLP has not requested deleted, Ginger Jolie has George The Dragon (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and actresses-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:48, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:48, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The AfD the nominator refers to is here. Articles for deletion/Ginger Jolie.  I haven't looked hard at this article yet, but that AfD does not appear to have consensus, and even if it did, precedent needs to have already happened. gnfnrf (talk) 15:53, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Despite all that, and the lack of clear articulation in the nomination, this actress appears to fail WP:PORNBIO. No major awards/feature appearances, no groundbreaking films, blockbusters, or genre establishments, and no mainstream news coverage. gnfnrf (talk) 16:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete because of the notability issue. (Disclaimer: I really don't want to know what 'notability' is for a pornstar.) I would like to add that the Ginger Jolie discussion is not very relevant here: she apparently does have notability, according to a majority (I think) of those commenting on the AfD--but I don't believe that discussion reached a consensus, as nominator has it, 'that articles like this one should be deleted.' Jolie wanted to be removed, and that is a totally different matter. Drmies (talk) 16:44, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Delete per David in DC. The nomination rationale is WP:POINT-ish. However flawed the nomination is, Vanessa Chase does not appear to pass WP:PORNBIO. • Gene93k (talk) 16:53, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * (change of vote) • Gene93k (talk) 20:20, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Doesn't pass WP:N or WP:PORNBIO. Epbr123 (talk) 17:06, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete The nomination is flawed, but the lack of general notability or specific WP:PORNBIO notability is manifest. David in DC (talk) 01:27, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep on the grounds that the rationale given by the nom could be used as precedent to have articles based upon porn stars eliminated from Wikipedia ("articles like this one"). At the moment all other considerations are invalid. I don't want to see this precedent set. If you want articles on adult entertainers banned from Wikipedia, push for a policy to address this via WP:BLP and WP:PORNBIO. Although I feel this individual is notable within her Genre and I believe may have some awards under her belt, no prejudice to a relisting with a rationale that does not smack of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. If there is BLP-violating material, then by all means remove it; don't wait for an AFD. (The fact she is/was a porn actress, however, is not BLP-violating in any way). 23skidoo (talk) 13:23, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Precedent? We judge articles the old fashioned way in these parts, individually.  Precedent is for wiki-lawyers. This subject is not notable.  Unless this subject is notable, this article should be deleted.  The proper response to Ginger Jolie, on this review page is "Ginger who?". David in DC (talk) 19:11, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per the nominator, the lack of non-trivial coverage of this WP:BLP subject is troublesome.  coccyx bloccyx  (toccyx)  18:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - She was one of the top gonzo/interracial actresses in the mid-nineties. I am sure she was nominated several times for AVN awards from memory but, unfortunately, any source for AVN nominations do not go back that far. Brief mentions in several books about pornography under google books. Morbidthoughts (talk) 15:58, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * delete not mentioned in depth or in a large number of third party, reliable sources independent of her roles themselves, not notable. and only six books briefly mention her. Sticky Parkin 18:35, 22 October 2008 (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.