Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Riri Kōda

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. Seems like neither award nor sources are adequate to establish notability. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Riri Kōda[edit]

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

A BLP that lacks sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail. Sigificant RS coverage not found. The article is cited to online directories, interviews, passing mentions, industry PR materials, commercial websites, and other sources otherwise not suitable for notability. Does not meet WP:PORNBIO / WP:NACTOR. No significant awards or notable contributions to the genre. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:25, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:45, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:45, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:45, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Hasn't won any awards, Fails PORNBIO & GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 01:35, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the article cites multiple sources and the subject has won Pink Grand Prix.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 04:21, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pink Grand Prix does not appear to be an award that would generate the sort of WP:SIGCOV as required for BLPs. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate directory of otherwise non-notable actors. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:01, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Virtually all the substantive sourcing is primary or promotional; the many database entries for nonnotable videos the subject performed in do nothing to support notability. The claimed award is given by a low-circulation fan magazine and no basis hasbeen provided to demonstrate its alleged significance. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 10:40, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
delete award cited is no where near our requirements and sourcing shown to fail GNG. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:38, 23 February 2018 (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.