Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashley Juggs

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. —Doug Bell ^talk 09:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ashley Juggs[edit]

prod was removed without comment or discussion by User:69.84.102.164. This actress fails WP:PORNBIO. Mikeblas 19:19, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Just for the sake of accuracy, this individual is a magazine and web model, not an actress, and therefore different criteria should apply when considering deletion under PORNBIO. 23skidoo 23:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Nothing's wrong with the article, it has an info box and some external links. Sure, it's not very long, but that doesn't mean it should be deleted. 2Pac 04:14, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:PORNBIO. No real assertion of notability. Like most wiki articles on porn models/actresses, it seems to exist solely for the sake of having another pair of breasts in the image namespace. --- RockMFR 07:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep articles should not assert notability, notability should be obvious from the article, this one seems to be, google her. --Buridan 13:53, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ Articles should assert notability. And google is not a point of policy for inclusion. Dismas|^(talk) 19:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Lijnema's vote below. Dismas|^(talk) 05:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

no, articles should not assert notability. there should be nothing in the article that directly addresses the question of notability unless it is pertinent to the person or topic. it is bad style and a bad assumption. --Buridan 23:04, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes WP:PORNBIO, a quick google showed me the movie The Incredible Ashley Juggs & Her Busty Friends, making her pass criteria #7. That should probably be added to the article, but I don't know if there is some pron-imdb that should be linked to, or if the Rottentomatoes entry is good. If someone else wants to do it, I wouldn't mind. :) --Lijnema 20:04, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Only thanks to Lijnema with linking showing she does pass WP:PORNBIO with #7. Without that its a delete. MrMacMan 23:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~. Doesn't appear to meet guidelines of WP:PORNBIO. WMMartin 00:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Cancel my ~~Delete~~ and Keep per criterion 7, as cited above. I even made a special effort to confirm that the video cited isn't a compilation, by tracking it down over the web. What an anatomically odd person ! WMMartin 00:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the proper way to cancel your vote is to use a strikethrough... which i did for you. I hope I didn't break proper procedure. MrMacMan 03:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep so long as the article's improved. --Wizardman 02:15, 9 December 2006 (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.