Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anna Ohura

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Ohura

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

Dunno about the taipai times but the other sourcing looks inadequate. Appears to fail pornbio and gng Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:27, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:40, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:41, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:41, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:41, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails PORNBIO & GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 04:57, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Hike The Monicas (talk) 16:51, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hike The Monicas - Any particular reason ? ... –Davey2010^Talk 18:18, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

because I'm tired of veteran Wikipedians deleting every article created by new Wikipedians. Hike The Monicas (talk) 19:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a valid reason so expect it to be totally ignored. –Davey2010^Talk 19:29, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article under consideration here was created by an IP editor in 2004. Like it or not, Wikipedia's mirad of rules and guidelines (including inclusion guidelines) have changed over time. Guy1890 (talk) 05:57, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's just a single-purpose account voting "people are mean so keep this!" in a handful of AfDs. These "votes" will be completely ignored, so not even worth the time to refute them anymore. Tarc (talk) 21:32, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No indication of notability, no coverage in reliable sources, just a pile of DVD reviews. Tarc (talk) 21:32, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - having allegedly "the largest breasts in Japanes porn" is not a good claim to notability, sources are mostly in-trade publications and primary pieces Kraxler (talk) 14:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. "Largest breasts" is not a convincing assertion of notability. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 14:59, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PORNBIO Hasteur (talk) 19:04, 28 August 2015 (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.