Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoe Voss

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--Ymblanter (talk) 10:32, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Zoe Voss[edit]

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

Fails PORNBIO since nominations have been stripped as a sign of notability in the guidelines. No independent reliable sources in the article and there seems to be no significant coverage of her in the available reliable sources online. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:41, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:ANYBIO. ANYBIO states "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times." The AVN Best New Starlet Award is a "well-known and significant award" and one of the few adult industry award categories with it's own WP article since it passes the GNG. One of the arguments made in favor of removing nominations from PORNBIO was the high number of nominees in each category, but the XRCO Awards are more exclusive than the AVN and XBIZ awards. Zoe Voss was nominated for New Starlet by XRCO and she was one of only five nominees. This clearly demonstrates that she made a big impact on the adult film industry in her debut year. Rebecca1990 (talk) 03:11, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

:) Morbidthoughts (talk) 04:14, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. PORNBIO #3 states "Has been featured multiple times in notable mainstream media." How many is enough for "multiple"? So far, I found one mainstream appearance by Zoe Voss and I added it to the article. I'll keep searching to see if there's any other ones. Rebecca1990 (talk) 03:48, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno that body-double work is what that is all about. The credited crossover work of Traci Lords, for example, is what that means to me. Carrite (talk) 08:43, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails GNG and the SNG low bar for porn bio. Carrite (talk) 08:43, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator's very sound analysis. Also agree with Carrite's point about body-doubling. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 13:50, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - She's done mainstream work as well. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 19:56, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I concur with nominator's assessment. Single mainstream appearance does not confer notability. Finnegas (talk) 23:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails GNG and PORNBIO as nominator states. My own search for reliable source coverage yielded a brief book mention and an interview in a website of questionable reliability. Mainstream credit as body double/Waiting Room Girl falls way short of "featured multiple times in notable mainstream media". • Gene93k (talk) 02:26, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Gene93k. David in DC (talk) 22:07, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Subject does not pass the general notability guideline, as noted by others. In the interests of improving the encyclopedia, the multi-nomination aspect of wp:pornbio is deprecated as far as I am concerned. Tarc (talk) 16:54, 8 January 2014 (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.