Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veronica Vain

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. The article's subject is found to not be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:50, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Veronica Vain

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

Should be a textbook WP:BLP1E situation, a minor flurry of press coverage for an otherwise non-notable individual, an investment banker who posted nude pictures, quit, and entered the porn business. WP:PORNBIO doesn't even enter the situation here, as she has no yet done anything noteworthy in her chosen new career field. Tarc (talk) 20:20, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Liam987 (talk) 20:40, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now, it appears to be way too soon to create an article about the subject, especially as she has not even started her so much publicized (but currently non-existent) new career in the adult industry, and her former career as an investment banker looks certainly non-notable. The subject received reliable coverage, and while she has some high chances to become some sort of Belle Knox in the short future if she keeps on attracting coverage and media attention in the next months, this is a clear WP:BLP1E/WP:NOTNEWS situation for now. Cavarrone 20:46, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:PORNBIO (hasn't performed in anything yet, much less won an award). I recommend watching the contributions of user AdultUpdates, who, if truth-in-self-labeling applies, is clearly WP:HERE for WP:COI WP:PROMO purposes. Pax 02:51, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

C'mon, it's a new editor who created a single article (this one) which incidentally (ignoring BLP1E) has some credible claims of notability per GNG, it seems a bit too soon to say "clearly WP:HERE for WP:COI WP:PROMO purposes", let's AGF. Cavarrone 07:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"New"? It's labeled an "alternative account" right on his user page. His first edit was to create a new article with a table, and his user page contains formatting gimmicks no wet-behind-the-ears editor would be aware of. (He's now "retired" after only a week's worth of "new" SPA activity; if I had to venture a solid guess, I would surmise his fellow COI industry cohorts advised him to pick a new name less likely to arouse suspicions leading to AfDs and SPIs.) Pax 15:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There's nothing that points to any notability. In time, she may became notable but not currently -- fdewaele, 11:47 AM, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:08, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unfortunately looks don't count towards notability .... and she fails PORNBIO, –Davey2010^Talk 21:03, 25 March 2015 (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.