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 keep. A subject that meets WP:BIO can still be notable even if they fail the specific guideline (here WP:PORNBIO). As the IP editor points out, PORNBIO does not make other notability guidelines obsolete and none of the delete !votes addressed this issue at all. That there are far more of them does not make the argument stronger, especiall since they all were "does not meet PORNBIO". RegardsSoWhy 09:35, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriella Fox[edit]

Gabriella Fox (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

The subject of the article does not appear to meet any of the WP:Pornbio criteria. The subject also does not appear to be otherwise notable. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 04:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Delete Non-notable, needless porn fandom spam article. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 04:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions.David in DC (talk) 18:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Passes WP:N due to her coverage by AVN and XBiz. WP:N trumps WP:PORNBIO.86.142.164.55 (talk) 23:37, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Fails WP:PORNBIO. One award nomination doesn't get you past it. Niteshift36 (talk) 09:19, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Does not meet WP:PORNBIO. Algébrico (talk) 11:12, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, she does. WP:PORNBIO states "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject." 86.142.164.55 (talk) 19:04, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:PORNBIO doesn't state that. Algébrico (talk) 19:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Near the top of the page. 86.142.164.55 (talk) 09:00, 4 August 2009 (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.