Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avy Scott (2nd 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. Sandstein 21:08, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Avy Scott

[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)

article is cited to online directories, industry publicity materials, and other sources otherwise not suitable for notability. Does not meet WP:PORNBIO / WP:NACTOR. No significant awards or notable contributions to the genre; the award category of "Best New Starlet (Fan's Choice)" is not significant. Mainstream appearances do not rise to the level of WP:ENT.

Last AfD closed as "Keep" in 2007, but the arguments for retaining the article were not convincing, such as: "over 100 films and nominated for two AVN awards". PORNBIO has been significantly tightened since then, so it's a good time to revisit. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:05, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 04:09, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 04:09, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 04:09, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 04:09, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:25, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Shame we can't keep based on looks tbh, Anyway no evidence of notability, Hasn't won any notable awards, Fails PORNBIO & GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 20:54, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets of WP:PORNBIO. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 10:11, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This yet another "meets of WP:PORNBIO" vote ignores the fact that a fan award falls short of thewell-known and significant industry award standard at WP:PORNBIO. Winning just any porn award does not automatically meet the guideline. • Gene93k (talk) 10:38, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, there is no official consensus for that NightMoves Award is not well-known and significant industry award, so. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 16:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is a consensus on this point, reflected in the outcomes of multiple AFDs. Moreover, the NightMoves awards fail PORNBIO on its face, sincethey are not "industry awards", but are made by a local, giveaway magazine for a single city. No "official" consensus here means there wasn't an RFC, and 99+% of the time here, consensus is clear enough without one. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 17:34, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete getting an award in an industry that gives out awards like candy is not a sign of notability. If this does in fact meet the pornographic biography notability guidelines it is high time we scapped them for more meaninful guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:24, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete BLPs need better sources than this. Fan awards don't cut the mustard. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:40, 10 July 2018 (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.