Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaime Hammer (2nd nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Clear consensus for deletion and, also, the article lacks the sources to meet WP:BIO. TerriersFan (talk) 16:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Jaime Hammer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable glamour model/not-quite-hardcore porn performer, failing WP:ENT, WP:PORNBIO, and the GNG; caught up in the recent Playmate bulk AFD despite not being a Playmate, kept for procedural reasons despite a preponderance of !delete votes. No significant coverage; all GBooks hits are spurious or trivial, as are all the GNews hits except a hometown newspaper profile with very little information about her but a great deal of kvetching about how poorly Playboy pays. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:26, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep On general principal that an AFD that was a keep 3 weeks ago should not be here again unless something has changed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:32, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The closing admin specifically said the article could be immediately relisted. At the time of the close, procedural votes aside, there were 3 delete !votes, one keep !vote, and one redirect/merge !vote. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:39, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete O.K. I will go back to my original opinion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:54, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The closing admin specifically said the article could be immediately relisted. At the time of the close, procedural votes aside, there were 3 delete !votes, one keep !vote, and one redirect/merge !vote. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:39, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 20:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:35, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Appeared in magazines, but that's what lots of entertainers do, so she is not notable because she hasn't done anything "special"Curb Chain (talk) 12:57, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note to closing administrator Subject is on List of Playboy NSS models, and it says "See individual entry". If you delete the entry, please move the pertinent information, because it would be stupid to refer to an entry that no longer exists.SPNic (talk) 12:28, 13 June 2011 (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.