Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kitty Foxx

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. czar 03:06, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kitty Foxx

[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)

An apparent WP:MEMORIAL page on an unremarkable adult actress. Created by Special:Contributions/Shaolinrob with no other contributions outside this topic and edited by a variety of SPAs.

Sigificant RS coverage not found. The article is cited to online directories, personal website, and other sources otherwise not suitable for notability. Does not meet WP:PORNBIO / WP:ENT. No significant awards or notable contributions to the genre. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:52, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:48, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:48, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:15, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:16, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:16, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:47, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Extremely notable in her field in the early 1990s. This is one example where WP:PORNBIO exhibits an Internet-era bias, as this individual is unlikely to have much by way of Internet content because she predated the Net by some 10 years.Accesscrawl (talk) 12:31, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kitty Foxx's career was from 1992 to 2003. The World Wide Web started in 1994 and covers most of that period. PORNBIO is oriented towards awards (which were around at the time), not online sources. If she received recognition, some traces should be readily available. As for the article, the few quality sources aren't about the subject. • Gene93k (talk) 13:45, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as no evidence of any notability, Hasn't won any notable/significant awards, Fails PORNBIO & GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 20:50, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is high time that we stop listening to arguments from lack of information. There is no sign that Foxx is notable, and no hand waving about this "pre-dating the internet" will change that fact.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:10, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of reliable source coverage and per my comments above. No claim of passing WP:PORNBIO and the low quality sources fail WP:BASIC. Another porn performer in a niche genre. • Gene93k (talk) 22:39, 8 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.