Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Cruz (3rd 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 delete. Deferring any salting to WP:RFPP Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:33, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Annie Cruz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

The article does not meet BIO or PORNBIO; the award listed is not significant and well known. The article is sourced to interviews, award listings or self-cited to the subject's web site. No meaningful bio content provided; no significant RS coverage can be found.

The article was kept at an AfD in 2012; PORNBIO has been tightened since then, and I believe this article is worth revisiting. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:58, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:58, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:58, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, not notable and no significant RS coverage, as noted. Kierzek (talk) 03:03, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The awards that do exist are part of a PR network and do not garner even the minimal attention that would be needed for them to be worth considering as grounds for inclusion of an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:01, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The only thing approaching independent reliable sourcing is a wedding announcement. If that's enough to make you notable, I get to write articles about just about everyone in my high school graduating class, as well as most of our teachers. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 20:39, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: fails PORNBIO -- simply not enough body of work. Quis separabit? 00:08, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  Also, since this is the 3rd nomination, maybe some SALT on those fries? Quis separabit? 13:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Salt is a good idea given that this is the third nom. K.e.coffman (talk) 14:58, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - there's nothing there to show notability. — Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 20:27, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Found a passing mention here, but otherwise I guess not even close to passing GNG. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 20:36, 15 October 2016 (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.