Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trina Michaels

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. czar 06:51, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trina Michaels

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

Nominations do not a pornbio worthy article make... Really can you call pornbio worthy. Non notable. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:15, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:24, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:24, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:25, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:25, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:25, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:28, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, not only passes WP:PORNBIO but also Wikipedia:ENTERTAINER, having been featured in mainstream media and is now associated with pro-wrestling. Miami Herald, GQ, Rant Sports. Valoem ^talk ^contrib 21:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:34, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- GNG and PORNBIO fail (no awards listed, only nominations). The above coverage are trivial mentions. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:41, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as although sources have been provided they're very poor and IMHO don't confirm notability, –Davey2010^Talk 18:37, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom as non-notable. --Lockley (talk) 09:49, 18 June 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.