Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obsession (actress)

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:10, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Obsession (actress)

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

Fails PORNBIO and the GNG. No substantive assertion of notability. No awards, only nominations. No nontrivial independent reliable sourcing (the NYT reference does not even mention the article subject). Negligible biographical content, sourced or otherwise. Deprodded with spurious rationale. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 01:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 08:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 08:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 08:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:14, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:15, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non notable porno actress, hasn't won any significant/notable awards, Fails PORNBIO & GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 01:09, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This isn't a biography, it's a directory listing -- and there's no evidence at all that it has the potential to be more than that. --Calton | Talk 02:48, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Only real PORNBIO claim is appearing in a "blockbuster" work of porn. Notability does not transfer without support from reliable sources. We have a cast listing on a site that markets the work and a RS article about the work that doesn't even mention the actress. As for GNG, making one writer's greatest list in a pop culture mag is hardly sufficient. • Gene93k (talk) 14:18, 20 January 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.