The result was keep. Carlossuarez46 19:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't meet WP:PORNBIO. Hasn't received any awards, isn't notable in a particular sub-genre, isn't particularly prolific, and hasn't been covered in the mainstream press. PornWatcher 06:17, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Corpx, for the links. If she really has been a "serious contender" for these awards, then, sure, I'd grant she meets WP:PORNBIO, and I'd be willing to withdraw the AfD.
However, the first link listed devotes a whole of two sentences (one short paragraph) in a page-long article; she was one of fifteen contenders for the award described. In the second article, she is listed as being nominated for three awards, but each award has five nominees, and there is no separate text describing Ms. Lane's chances. The third article is similar; she is listed as nominated for two awards (among eight each), and there is no prose mentioning her.
Is this really the collective judgment --- that these articles describe her as a serious contender for these awards? Could you all please comment further to this effect? Thanks. PornWatcher 20:32, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And to come back to your earlier point about objective criteria for choosing an award winner, say for "AVN starlet of the year," don't things like video sales numbers, size of fan base, and contracts for endorsements (if there is such a thing) come into play? PornWatcher 18:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]