Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hazel Tucker (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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:51, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hazel Tucker (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)

Fails ENT and gng and would not have passed pornbio either Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:44, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:44, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:17, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:18, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:18, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:18, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• • Delete: fails WP:ENT / WP:BASIC. PORNBIO has been deprecated & no significant RS coverage is available, so delete. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:25, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Lacks coverage from reliable secondary sources, thus failing WP:BASIC and WP:ENT. • Gene93k (talk) 05:02, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a non-notable pornographic performer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:31, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Only claim to notability is based on "awards" given by a porn producer to promote its own product lines, which should not have been treated as meeting even the most lenient PORNBIO requirements (which, of course, are no longer sufficient). The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 23:44, 22 May 2019 (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.