Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jody Hoskins

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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 23:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jody Hoskins

Not notable; article is mostly a list -- Gmatsuda (talk) 20:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep AfD is not article cleanup; she's notable, but you're right, the article is pretty crappy. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Simply appearing in Playboy more than once makes one notable? -- Gmatsuda (talk) 21:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hmm, I know she's done some Mortal Kombat work; that's the entire reason she's on my watchlist at all. I'll have to dig a bit deeper.
    That said, I think appearing in Playboy publications repeatedly over a span of eight years should at least count for something. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but that's not enough to make her notable. IMHO. Of course, that IS rather subjective. If someone can come up with more and can provide verifiable citations, fine. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 21:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the info box, I think the fact that she apparently has three breasts is pretty notable! ;-) More seriously, looking at WP:PORNBIO it looks like simple repeat appearance in Playboy publications aren't enough unless you get picked as playmate or something similar. I do note she's been a cover model once, and appears to have had considerable coverage (or lack thereof, more likely!) in Playboy's Sexy Swimsuits February 1996 per the listed appearances. But that's probably not quite enough. MadScot (talk) 00:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - appearing in a bunch of Playboy magazines establishes that she is a working model, but does not establish her as a notable working model. There is no coverage about her in reliable sources that I could find. For example, how could we verify that she has 3 natural breasts as stated in the infobox. :) -- Whpq (talk) 16:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:41, 6 October 2008 (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.