Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kota Sky

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. Courcelles (talk) 21:45, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kota Sky[edit]

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

Fails pornbio and gng. Nominations no longer count Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:56, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:55, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:59, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:59, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as meets PORNBIO & GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 22:13, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How does this performer pass PORNBIO or GNG? No award wins, just nominations. Where is the substantial coverage by multiple independent reliable sources? The citations in the article are interviews (primary sources), blog posts and passing mentions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:36, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
She's a rather famous adult film star. I did some brief research and found an award win, which I added to the awards and nominations section. Landed here randomly and have no real interest though, so I'll let those more familiar determine if that affects whether or not this article passes PORNBIO or GNG.Brakoholic (talk) 15:52, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's apparently a subtrivial if not outright fake award, probably devised by the subject's publicist. It's sourced only to "Rising Star PR", and the press release doesn't even say who gave out the award or when and where it was given out. There's nothing to indicate it's even minimally notable, and certainly falls far, far short of the PORNBIO "well-known/significant" standard. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 17:55, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails GNG. Carrite (talk) 15:30, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Promotionally sourced BLP that lacks even a legitimate assertion of notability. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 14:28, 30 September 2015 (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.