Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anita Dark

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. -- Cirt (talk) 15:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anita Dark[edit]

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

Fails to meet any of the four WP:PORNBIO criteria, as she has not won a well-known award; has not received nominations for well-known awards in multiple years; has not made unique contributions to a specific pornographic genre; and has not been featured multiple times in notable mainstream media. NW (Talk) 22:43, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Tabercil (talk) 05:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:16, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Well-known in the industry. Just look at the international wikis. --Hixteilchen (talk) 14:24, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Other wikipedia projects cannot be used to establish notability, as they do not pass the reliable source guideline. This keep is without merit. Tarc (talk) 14:45, 10 January 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) 23:58, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Cirt (talk) 01:42, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, such a small article is most certainly not required. No reliable coverage from 3rd party sources. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 02:26, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Should have been eligible for a "no assertion of notability speedy IMO. Otherwise it is just a run-of-the-mill WP:GNG failure, and obviously WP:PORNBIO. Tarc (talk) 14:45, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. "No assertion of notability" is not grounds for speedy deletion. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:47, 10 January 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.