Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikki Nova

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. Doesn't meet PORNBIO and I agree with The Big Bad One that there is not enough to pass GNG, either. Randykitty (talk) 16:33, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nikki Nova

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

Delete: A non-notable pornstar who fails WP:Pornbio. She has no major award wins, made no significant contributions to porn, and is not in any Hall of Fame. She appeared in Howard Stern and appeared in several softcore AVN flicks, but that's not mainstream enough, per WP:Pornbio. Redban (talk) 19:57, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:57, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:57, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - encyclopedic. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 21:07, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained vote that must have minimal worth in this Afd.Redban (talk) 21:12, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:43, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:57, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - She has done girl-on-boy hardcore which is readily available on the Internet. What makes her notable is the decades she only did girl-on-girl and as a star of Playboy's Night Calls, her girl-on-boy XXX hardcore is worthy to keep article, if it is allowed to be honestly edited and updated. In the past legitimate updates are removed for some unknown reason. If not, DELETE, and let her go to the annals of forgotten Porn history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chillinthriller (talk • contribs) 09:21, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where in Wikipedia's notability requirements does it say that "girl-on-girl" or "girl-on-boy XXX hardcore" is sufficient to confer notability on a subject? Squinge (talk) 10:00, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - She passes the GNG considering her plight received coverage from NBC News [1] and the Phoenix New Times [2] several years after initial coverage of her injury. Morbidthoughts (talk) 12:13, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article as it is clearly fails on all three criteria of PORNBIO. No notable awards or any other notable presence. -- fdewaele, 28 December 2014, 23:49 CET.
Delete. There seems to be no case that the subject passes PORNBIO. That leaves only the question of whether the limited coverage of her injury/recovery is enough to satisfy the GNG, or whether it is of BLP1Eish nature and insufficient to sustain an article. The TV news piece does not appear to be coverage by the network news operation itself, itself, but a local news piece from an affiliate that was made available for reuse by other affiliates but not aired nationally. Therefore, I don't think it's sufficient to establish notability. There are many similarly circulated stories this time of year about people with elaborate Christmas displays on their homes, some recurring from year to year, and those don't justify individual bios. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 01:08, 31 December 2014 (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.