Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ami Yamazaki

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. Yunshui ^雲 _水 11:51, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ami Yamazaki[edit]

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

A BLP that lacks sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail. Sigificant RS coverage not found. The article is cited to online directories, interviews, commercial websites, and other sources otherwise not suitable for notability. Does not meet WP:PORNBIO, WP:NACTOR, or WP:MUSICBIO. No significant awards or notable contributions to the genre. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:18, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:40, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:41, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:41, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:41, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:41, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not pass the general notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:26, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it stands. I am happy to be corrected by a Japanese reader but none of the article's sources appear reliable to me. Nota bene for anybody attempting to assess these sources at the office or on the couch next to a spouse: Attackers.net is a porn website. You're welcome. A Train^talk 15:36, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This misses the mark on several guidelines: WP:GNG, WP:OR, and WP:BLP are all three problematic. The WP:LINKROT in the external references and therefore verifiable credibility are reason enough to call this article into question. I don't see a larger firm that this particular entry could be Merged under. Perhaps this should go to WP:AfC level. Ventric (talk) 23:05, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non notable porn actress, Hasn't won any notable/significant awards, Fails PORNBIO & GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 13:51, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails notability criteria across the board. No reliable sources cover this subject. Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion WP:PROMO. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 04:28, 8 January 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.