Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SexMex

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:15, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SexMex

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No coverage in WP:RS, fails WP:NWEB. Störm (talk) 17:00, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:49, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:49, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:49, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:50, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:50, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE - No meaningful coverage after going through several pages of google results. Some passing references, as in some person had mentioned working with them while discussing something else, or the name came up while discussing an expo, but nothing actually about the site. ogenstein (talk) 05:50, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The content seems like it should be merged into an article about its founder, Fernando Deira.[1][2][3][4] [5] Morbidthoughts (talk) 15:40, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While not optimal to my mind, this would be preferable to 'keep' (assuming the founder passes muster for which I have no opinion on at this time). ogenstein (talk) 04:35, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Nothing pretty significant here. Fails WP:GNG. Camron6598 (talk) 18:43, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 00:41, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete - Not only is there a lack of coverage but the page itself lacks substance. If you truly believe it deserves a place here, write a better page. MaskedSinger (talk) 16:09, 6 June 2019 (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.