Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Almond tease

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. Failing WP:PORNBIO. FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 10:24, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Almond tease

Almond tease (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Subject fails to meet WP:PORNBIO non-notable porn model with website. OfficeGirl 05:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - After extensive investigation, I must agree with nom. Fails WP:PORNBIO. --Evb-wiki 13:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Evb-wiki, it's a fortunate thing that we have diligent editors like you to closely scrutinize the evidence in cases like these. OfficeGirl 22:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

There's an thread at ANI wherein a specialized spa needs help from a motivated editor. Sounds like it's right up Evb-wiki's alley. ;-) - KrakatoaKatie 22:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy delete under A7, no claim to notability even by our very low porn standards. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable porn model. Keb25 14:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Fails WP:PORNBIO ♠PMC♠ 18:18, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - the article does claim importance ("Internet celebrity"), so A7 doesn't apply. A7 is separate from notability and sourcing, so an article's subject can have zero notability but assert importance. That's what this piece has done, so it has to go through AFD or prod. - KrakatoaKatie 22:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

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.