Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Felicia Fox

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. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:00, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Felicia Fox[edit]

[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)

Seems to fail all wikipedia notability guidelines. Did a WP:BEFORE search and nothing remotely close to SIGCOV showed up. Awards won were minor ones that wouldn't have counted in the last version of the now-defunct PORNBIO notability guideline. GoldenAgeFan1 (talk) 14:07, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. GoldenAgeFan1 (talk) 14:07, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. GoldenAgeFan1 (talk) 14:07, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. GoldenAgeFan1 (talk) 14:07, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:23, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Negligible RS coverage fails WP:BASIC and fails to support claims of meeting WP:ENT. • Gene93k (talk) 00:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:ENT because of her AVN awards, basically the Oscars of the adult industry. I googled and found some new sources to add and have added them now.Peter303x (talk) 01:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The AVN award she won wouldn't have even met the later versions of PORNBIO, let alone ENT since it was a lower level scene award. The sources added like AVN, Adult Industry News Source and Mike South were interviews and not considered RS anyway, especially the latter two. The Creative Loafing one just has a trivial passing mention of her. Still nowhere near meeting any notability guideline. GoldenAgeFan1 (talk) 02:26, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Concurring comment with GoldenAgeFan1. I'll add that AdultFYI and Mike South are unreliable self-published sources. The AdultFYI article is an obvious promotional press release with one sentence of editorial comment tacked on. Finally, PORNBIO was taken down because porn awards generally lack independent RS support for their significance. Claims of passing WP:ENT or WP:ANYBIO also fail without that support. • Gene93k (talk) 03:37, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article would not have survived under the old pornographic notability guidelines. With those entirely scapped this article has even less standing to survive and needs to be deleted now.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:58, 17 March 2021 (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.