Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ebony Mystique

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:36, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ebony Mystique

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Subject doesn’t in any way meets WP:GNG. Gabriel^t@lk 07:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Gabriel^t@lk 07:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Sexuality and gender. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:13, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:13, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as failing WP:BASIC and WP:ENT. Notability is barely asserted (A7), and much of that claim is by inheritance. No significant independent RS coverage cited or found in search. • Gene93k (talk) 10:26, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all I find are press releases by Xbix. Oaktree b (talk) 14:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC) [reply]
Comment May meet WP:PORN BIO on the 2nd criteria, given she won the Best Curve Appeal Movie award according to the article, there is a possibility of notability there on the grounds that the project that she received that award for Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. Someone should look further into her projects to exhaust the possibility of notability there.--PiccklePiclePikel (talk) 16:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The films she appeared in won the awards. AVN credits such awards to the producers and directors. Claims of meeting WP:ENT or WP:ANYBIO criteria need support from independent reliable sources than can verify such uniqueness, innovation, etc. WP:PORNBIO was deprecated as a stand-alone SNG back in 2019, as porn awards are generally not strong evidence of notability. Appeals to criterion ENT#2 based on porn awards always fail without additional evidence. • Gene93k (talk) 17:14, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, now I see that she was one of 5 actors to appearing in the winning film, and that the director of that film was one of those actors as well, however that director is not her. --PiccklePiclePikel (talk) 17:33, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep based on the explanation/sources explained by Gene93K. Appears to have made a unique contribution to a field of "entertainment", I suppose the adult film industry is a form of entertainment; form of media let's say. Oaktree b (talk) 13:54, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What in my comments above shows any evidence to support a WP:ENT claim? The independent sources have little to say about this performer. Here are the sources. 1. Announcement in XBIZ (not independent) 2. Interview in AVN (not independent) 3. IMDb citation to support filmography 4. Nominations roster for a minor porn award - one of 10 nominees (even the old PORNBIO SNG deprecated this many years ago). 5. Awards database entry for winning film, where performer is listed in the cast. There is no substantial independent coverage about the subject. As a porn award does not even distinguish the film as notable per WP:NFILM. The database entry is promotional in tone with a link to its sales partner. There is very little to establish the Ms. Mystique's contributions as remarkable, never mind unique. • Gene93k (talk) 06:01, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not seeing anything that makes her notable. The award seems insignificant and was awarded to the movie itself and not her, and saying she's made any "unique contributions" to the field is really stretching it. If that changes (since she's still active) then the page can be recreated. More sources are needed as well, to help substantiate notability. GoldenAgeFan1 (talk) 12:46, 2 September 2022 (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.