Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexus Winston

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. The argument here revolves around whether Winston passes PORNBIO#5, as there is no assertion that she passes any of the other criteria. I find that HW's argument that #5 should not be used where subject obviously fails the other criteria is compelling, and effectively refutes the argument put by Morbidthoughts. Kevin (talk) 10:31, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alexus Winston[edit]

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

No significant coverage and doesn't pass WP:PORNBIO. Epbr123 (talk) 10:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 18:16, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:27, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - After reading her Askmen profile, she satisfies Criteria 5 of WP:PORNBIO for me due to her appearances in Maxim, E's Wild On, several B movies, along with her Get Out show on HDNet. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:37, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - May meet WP:PORNBIO #5, but the article needs a lot of work. -- Stillwaterising (talk) 18:58, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:02, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per her Askmen profile. Wiwaxia (talk) 01:38, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per Mordbidthoughts. Joe Chill (talk) 01:59, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Askmen.com does not satisfy WP:RS, and PORNBIO#5 shouldn' be used to rescue an article whose subject falls so far below the notability standard in all relevant areas that there's no reason to believe the subject even remotely approaches the the GNG. But even if we accept askmen.com as a source, it describes her movie appearances as "marginal skinflicks," not mainstream films, which don't satify the "mainstream" test of PORNBIO#5. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:53, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- About whether askmen is a reliable source. Good enough for the noticeboard, good enough for me. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:58, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Askmen shouldn't be used in these arguements because it's not mentioned in the article. Her appearanes are in IMDB which is referenced. Her "movie" credits are little-known made-for-tv skin flicks and her tv show had almost no coverage. I'm changing my answer to delete. --Stillwaterising (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I risked a google search and found she was also a correspondent for Wild On!, [1]. I take it that penthouse pets are not considered as notable as playmates, because playmates all seem to have articles on here?--Milowent (talk) 07:16, 3 November 2009 (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.