Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Kruger

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 as per discussion; no meaningful notability or sources. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 16:24, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Kruger[edit]

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

WP:BLP of a pornographic film actor, making no claim of notability per WP:PORNBIO and sourced entirely to primary source confirmation of his existence on his own self-published porn website, rather than reliable source coverage about him in media. A better claim of notability and better sourcing might be possible, so I'm willing to withdraw this if the article receives the necessary improvements, but nothing here gives him an automatic "just because he exists" freebie. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 21:36, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. — Music1201 ^talk 23:35, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:16, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:17, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as still questionable for the applicable notability, no convincing signs of better. SwisterTwister talk 04:35, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails GNG without substantial coverage by independent reliable sources. Fails PORNBIO without award wins. I found some nominations while checking for A7 speedy eligibility. Notability may be asserted, but it is not established. • Gene93k (talk) 04:41, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Gene93k. Not even a credible claim of notability. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 12:55, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above - Fails PORNBIO & GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 18:26, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Concur with nominator and view's expressed above. Finnegas (talk) 20:33, 10 April 2016 (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.