Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Cruz (2nd nomination)

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 keep. There is a clear consensus, that the subject of the article passes WP:PORNSTAR. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 08:05, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Annie Cruz

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

Fails WP:PORNBIO, WP:ENT, and the GNG. No reliably sourced biographical content. Most GNews/GBooks hits are spurious, remaining small fraction are trivial. AVN Award claim is phony; subject does not evewn appear in that video [1]. Adam Film World Award lacks significance and does not contributes to notability under WP:PORNBIO. There's one other claim of an AVN nomination for a group sex scene out there, but even if verified a single such nom doesn't demonstrate notability. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:25, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:42, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:42, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - In addition to the above, all well stated by the nominator, this article is a dumping ground for trivia and unsourced hornblowing. BLP violations, too? Sure enough. And where is the source indicating that educational background? This is an absolutely classic case of a non-notable GNG FAIL that should not be the beneficiary any low bar "special" PORNBIO back door into the encyclopedia. Carrite (talk) 03:56, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - One another Kiwi Ling Case. Fails PORNBIO. Cavarrone (talk) 18:05, 3 January 2012 (UTC) Change to Keep: passes PORNBIO, per below. - Cavarrone (talk) 21:05, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The AVN nomination was false, but these two nominations aren't (and yes, the F.A.M.E. nomination was from the final round). Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 08:24, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Nominations. --Lexusuns (talk) 16:41, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:03, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per nominations.SPNic (talk) 13:41, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - PORNBIO cannot be abused as a backdoor for complete notability failures. This person's sources are to her own website, industry websites, and the award junk. Tarc (talk) 16:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm confused as to how WP:PORNBIO is being abused. After I got rid of the false nomination and then added the two real nominations, PORNBIO was satisfied. Speaking of that, it seemed that everyone changed their !votes to "keep" after my addition, so why was this relisted? Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 09:04, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Because XBIZ is a component of a PR business promoting clients in the adult video industry, and its "awards" receive very little independent coverage. Most of the GNews hits yutn out to be XBIZ itself, blogs, examiner.com-type sites, or recycled hype; even the AVN newshits are mostly press releases. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 11:40, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keepper WP:PORNBIO. --WR Reader (talk) 16:12, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not Wikipedia notable promotion. Youreallycan 02:32, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you mean by "promotion"? Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 07:15, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per PORNBIO. I see nothing wrong with AVN and related sources. Dismas|^(talk) 05:30, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Dismas et al --82.41.22.244 (talk) 17:44, 17 January 2012 (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.