Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy San Dimas

Andy San Dimas

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

Delete. Pornographic actress does not meet notability criteria presented at WP:PORNBIO. Has not received (nor nominated for) any industry awards (in multiple years). Has not made unique contributions; has not starred in an iconic, groundbreaking or blockbuster feature; is not in an industry Hall of Fame. Refs limited to IMDb, AFDb, and iafd.com. Cindamuse (talk) 11:21, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Clarification: Subject was nominated for AVN awards in 2010, just not in multiple years. Cindamuse (talk) 01:36, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- My WP:Crystal ball says this article will be undeleted in about 2 weeks. Morbidthoughts (talk) 18:17, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment. Doubtful for two weeks. In January? Maybe, if she wins. Cindamuse (talk) 02:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 15:36, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from talk page

"Dear Wikipedia,

KEEP ANDY!

I'd like to request that you go ahead and visit Google.com, type in "Andy San Dimas" and see what happens. Does your computer screen not immediately fill up with everything Andy related? So why is it that you feel she doesn't deserve a Wikipedia page? The girl came from Hicktown, USA and made herself a place in the spotlight in bigtime LA. And I, for one, am so proud of her. I checked my watch and 15 minutes passed a long time ago. Andy isn't going anywhere but up. Do some research before you so quickly excuse her. Spencer Pratt deserves a Wikipedia page, but Andy doesn't? Posted by Coribaltimore

End of copy Peridon (talk) 16:36, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I nearly said 'nothing to show', but thought better of it. No indication of notability given. Bear in mind (sorry) that it's the article we are discussing, not a Google search. As to Pratt, he doesn't 'deserve' an article, but unfortunately there's enough coverage of him to support one. And one article's existence doesn't mean another should. I suppose it must be harder to establish notability in the porn world - one is rather unlikely to be profiled in The Telegraph. Look at WP:RS to see what sort of coverage is expected. Look at other porn performers' articles and see what they have to support notability. Peridon (talk) 16:36, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:26, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep multible nominations are enough! --Hixteilchen (talk) 21:37, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Nominations in multiple years are sufficient. Not just nominations in one year. Cindamuse (talk) 02:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]