Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristara Barrington

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:22, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kristara Barrington

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails pornbio and being an incidental _target in a wider investigation on underage porn doesnt make you notable, if all we have is an interview and that than the article is hopelessly and unfixably flawed, fails pornbio and gng and even if it passed would be Blp1e Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:55, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:03, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:08, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:08, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:08, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No actual claim of notability. Passing mention in news coverage of broader event does not itself establish notability, and makes no more than a minor contribution to it. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 14:46, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Nominator has consistently shown a poor understanding of WP:BLP1E. The San Diego Tribune article sourced is a year prior to the traci lords controversy. In addition to those two newspaper articles, Barrington is discussed in the Yale Journal of Law and Feminism[[1]]. She passes the general notability guidelines. Morbidthoughts (talk) 07:17, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- I reviewed the linked source, and the coverage of Barrington is rather shallow. Her name mostly appears in footnotes, while the discussion is more focused on the movies she appeared in, rather than on her biography. The article also states that she was "less known" than two other stars, so I don't see a strong claim of significance here. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails our guidelines for pronographic actresses and no other claim to notability exists.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:30, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.