Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruna Surfistinha

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 keep. - Bobet 18:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bruna Surfistinha

Bruna Surfistinha (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A blogging prostitute that got 15 min of TV fame. Yawn. -Doc^g 20:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Pointless waste of bytes. WP:BLP / WP:UNDUE apply, of course, but even if they didn't it would be pointless. Anything even vaguely porn related gets gazillions of hits, if we can believe them (which we can't). Guy (Help!) 20:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I agree with Guy and Doc. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 20:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC) Ok, so I misjudged her fame inside of Brazil. Based on what I saw below, keep. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and continue to expand and cleanup. Not a BLP issue, again, as she's very much a self-promoter - chances are, writing a blog and book about one's sexual exploits does not imply shame, nor should anyone's specific ethics get in the way. Over 150 Google News Hits in the archive, the page is at her pseudonym, there's no problem here. --badlydrawnjeff talk 21:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. She looks to be notorious enough. Herostratus 21:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep. May be a yawn for us but was she a real topic of debate in Brazil? Canuckle 21:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

If she is then keep. But that's not grounds for keep unless she is verifiable so. We don't keep things just in case they have merit.--Doc^g 21:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

We could ask the Brazilians, since they could have more coverage about her than what we have found in English. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 21:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• Weak keep' per User:Badlydrawnjeff. The Google News hits seem to indicate a fair enough amount of notability. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 21:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Per Guy & Doc. --Random ^{Say it here!} 23:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
• Keep This person is obviously notable in Brazil. SchmuckyTheCat 03:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Strong Keep

Delete bruna surfistina from wikipedia ? This is crazy. She is a well known person in Brazil. She gave interviews to dozens of brazilian periodicals. She Gave interviews to portuguese magazines She also gave interviews to the BBC, as well as argentinian media.

The new york times as well as the times of london made articles about Bruna Surfistinha.

From the times of London

"Online call girl exposes sex myths of Brazil".

SHE was known to her clients as Bruna the Surfer Girl, a chic São Paolo prostitute who fled her middle-class home at the age of 17 to sell herself to up to five men a day. Then Bruna took to the internet, and her racy accounts of life as a high-class Brazilian call girl have earned her international fame. Six months after she gave up prostitution to turn her blog into a bestselling book, Bruna — whose real name is Raquel Pacheco — has become an improbable sex symbol in Brazil and a potential goldmine for publishers and film-makers around the world.

bruna surfistinha in the times of london

Larry Rohter in a New York Times article does call Bruna (quote) " a cultural phenomenon ".

article about bruna in the NYT

The fact that bruna is not well known by many english speaking people does not mean she is not deserve to have an entry in wikipedia.

second reason : there is an entry of bruna surfistinha in the portuguese wikipedia.

Bruna surfistina in wikipedia portuguese version It does not make sense to delete an entry about bruna in the english version of wikipedia while leaving a large entry about the same person in the portuguese version of wikipedia.

Either she deserves or does not deserve an entry in wikipedia. If she does deserve an entry in wikipedia both wiki in english and portuguese should have such entry. If she does not deserve an entry ( as many claim ) if it is justifiable to delete bruna from the english version of wikipedia why the portuguese version has a large entry about that very same bruna? Deleting the english entry of bruna while leaving the portuguese entry does not make sense.

According to the Times of london Bruna is a Symbol in Brazil . Her book sold 100 000 copies. She more than deserves an entry in wikipedia.

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.