Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adriana Chechik: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 16:41, 9 March 2021

Adriana Chechik

[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)

None of the sources here cut the mustard and winning awards no longer determines notability.. fails gng and ent and we should have better sourcing for a blp Spartaz ^Humbug! 14:27, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:31, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:31, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:31, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Shellwood (talk) 14:34, 12 February 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Neutral She has a few articles where she is the either a major topic, or the sole topic in some fairly large media, but I'm not sure if it's enough to be notable. A profile in GQ India as well as a fairly large mention in this article from Jezebel are both independent of the porn industry. She also has significant routine coverage in the industry magazines. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:18, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You don't cut mustard, you spread it. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Only if you're classy. Normally I just squeeze it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:05, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Uncles its Tewkesbury Mustard! Davidstewartharvey (talk) 22:31, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

what have post offices got to do with this? Coolabahapple (talk) 01:46, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:29, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The multiple AVN awards suggest notability. Oaktree b (talk) 02:39, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This keep entry should be discarded in the final reckoning, as industry awards have been specifically deprecated for porn bios. Zaathras (talk) 22:27, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I think the GQ article supercedes awards and passes into general notability. Trillfendi (talk) 01:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete we do not have the multiple substantial articles in reliable, indepdent, secondary 3rd-party sources to show a pass of GNG. One article does not cut it for those purposes.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:45, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the GQ India piece is a staff article with no byline, and all it is is a reprint of a portion of a Reddit AMA. There is nothing else in the article to support notability of this person. Zaathras (talk) 22:27, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Currently heading towards no consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor ^Talk 20:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I can see the reason for the debate but this is well beyond a typical adult actor article in terms of sourcing.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 20:09, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Not to be as bad as other shit articles isn’t a policy based keep reason.Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Winning AVN awards for multiple number of times makes her notable. Kichu🐘 ^Discuss 05:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a completely made up argument. Awards are worthless ever since pornbio was depreceated. Both arguments here pretty much acknowledge this is a GNG fail and no ENT case has been made either. Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 <small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:TheSandDoctor|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">The</span><span style="color:#009933; font-weight:bold;">SandDoctor</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:TheSandDoctor|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 20:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --><noinclude>[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|Adriana Chechik]]</noinclude></div>
 *'''Keep''':  I can see the reason for the debate but this is well beyond a typical adult actor article in terms of sourcing.--'''[[User:Milowent|Milowent]]''' • <small><sup style="position:relative">[[Special:Contributions/Milowent|has]]<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-3.2ex;*left:-5.5ex;">[[User talk:Milowent|spoken]]</span></sup></small> 20:09, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
+**Not to be as bad as other shit articles isn’t a policy based keep reason.[[User:Spartaz|Spartaz]] <sup>''[[User talk:Spartaz|Humbug!]]''</sup> 16:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''': Winning AVN awards for multiple number of times makes her notable.  [[User:Kashmorwiki|Kichu]]🐘 <sup>[[User talk:Kashmorwiki|<i style="color:blue">Discuss</i>]]</sup> 05:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
+**This is a completely made up argument. Awards are worthless ever since pornbio was depreceated. Both arguments here pretty much acknowledge this is a GNG fail and no ENT case has been made either. [[User:Spartaz|Spartaz]] <sup>''[[User talk:Spartaz|Humbug!]]''</sup> 16:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)