Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jade-Blue Eclipse

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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 20:38, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jade-Blue Eclipse

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(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. Significant RS coverage not found. The article is cited to online directories, industry publicity materials, and other sources otherwise not suitable for notability. Does not meet WP:PORNBIO / WP:NACTOR. No significant awards or notable contributions to the genre. Alleged crimes listed do not rise to the level of encyclopedia notability. K.e.coffman (talk) 16:49, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lacks sourcing to pass GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:47, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:13, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Interest shown by only one reliable source, a local paper. Not enough to pass WP:BASIC. No real claim of notability per WP:NACTOR or WP:PORNBIO. An undocumented immigrant using a stolen ID doesn't rise to notability per WP:N/CA. Colorful but not notable. • Gene93k (talk) 23:43, 16 July 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.