658:
some of her
References on the bottom are adequate at best or does not even lead to a legitimate site when clicked on. In fact, some of the facts on the Mia Malkova page written about in her profile, even appear to be questionable at best. For reference number 4, you're unable to click on to verify, Reference 6 appears to a blog written on a little known site, and Reference 8 leads to an error page. The others are from AVN and XBIZ sites that give what I would view to be legitimate and reliable sources, for the less prominent Awards she has won. I would disagree that the Mia Malkova awards are of less prominence, but under the wikipedia rules, they appear to be viewed as such. Which in that case, why is her profile still up. Being mentioned as a Twistys treat of the month and Twistys treat of the year, in her profile article, is something some may question as relevant to even mention or reference, as well.
702:
award or awards, that anyone may easily verify. This is the only thing I'm unable to understand in regard to verifiable sources that those who object to her profile, keep bringing up in the discussion. She was announced by AVN as the winner in front of a large audience of fellow performers, writers, directors, reporters, etc. in person and recorded on video, and possibly mobile devices as well. She was seen accepting the Award or Awards on stage as it was being handed to her directly by the announcers.
569:
awards no longer consistently demonstrate reliable source coverage simply demonstrates that some aspects of PORNBIO may no longer accurately reflect GNG guidelines and BLP policy. If the claimed award no longer generates/reflects reliable source coverage, it is accurate to regard it as no longer significant, as the SNG uses that term.
653:
there no objection to the Mia
Malkova wikipedia profile, that doesn't even get the day, month, and year of her birth exact but is ambiguous, and the sourced References on the bottom are even less reliable than on the Abella Danger profile. Take a look for yourself, if you don't believe me. Click on
652:
I'm not an obsessive fan and to prove that, I've taken down most of my talking points. I'm an obsessive debater. Lets get that straight. Had I been an obsessive fan, I would have created her profile on wikipedia myself, rather than adding a few tidbits that I thought were relevant. Again, how is
615:
sngs are signposts to likely notability but in cases where blps do not pass the gng they take second place. The bottom line is that danger does not have the required sources to have a blp. All we can verify from sources are the awards, if not deleted the traditional solution is to redirect to a list
529:
performer on film has an IMDb profile. The biographical details are user submitted and are not considered reliable. By its nature, pornographic output produces inflated film counts. Dozens of films can be cranked out over a weekend. Being prolific in porn was discounted as a notability criterion ten
657:
reference on the bottom and tell me she deserves to be up, while Abella Danger needs to be taken down. If the Abella Danger profile page is taken down, then fine, I will agree to that conclusion. I'm more of a Mia
Malkova fan, but for some reason nobody is objecting to her profile being up, while
199:
An unremarkable adult actress. The article almost entirely consists on the awards/nomination table. No encyclopedically relevant prose & no sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail. The awards listed -- Hottest
Newcomer (Fan Award), Best New Starlet, etc. -- are not significant.
701:
at the very least. Still, how is there a lack of reliable sources, when one of the
References itself is from the AVN awards show internet site announcing the award being won, along with AVN also having video of Abella Danger receiving that award, along with the audience viewing her receiving the
568:
per nom's sound analysis. Winning awards that do not reflect or result in reliable source coverage is not sufficient to demonstrate notability; the applicable SNG clearly says as much. Notability generally rests on reliable source coverage, and the argument above that porn industry prominence and
399:-- the article does not list Ms Danger as having won "Female Performer of the Year". In any case, per many recent AfDs, a technical SNG pass does not exempt an article from the requirement to provide sourcing that that discuss the subject of the article directly and in detail.
348:
point 1. "Has won a well-known and significant industry award. Awards in scene-related and ensemble categories are excluded from consideration." This is clear policy. There's a reason we have templates for these awards and theres a reason every person has an article.
168:
243:
634:. Despite the wall of text and litany of plainly unreliable sourcing provided by an obsessive fan, above, nothing here provides an adequate basis for keeping a BLP which so patently fails GNG standards.
217:
679:
as AVN Award meets the #1 condition for Porn and per precedent by
Morbidthoughts. The danger (no pun intended) here is the significant lack of reliable sources to say anything other than a stub.
344:
as veterans of pornography deletions you both should know that the AVN Award for Best New
Starlet and the AVN Award for Female Performer of the Year are the two biggest awards which both pass
121:
752:- This individual has won multiple non-scene-related/non-ensemble awards from the four most well-known and significant award givers in the industry making this easily meet
688:
735:
indicates that if it would be a permastub then still the subject should not have an article. Lacking any other reliable sources for her, she should not have an article.
162:
706:
It would be like
Referencing the legitimate Oscars site, and then someone saying that it is not credible proof of a win, in regard to the Best Actress award winner.
298:
272:
128:
269:
514:
715:
17:
510:
94:
89:
98:
639:
574:
440:
81:
381:
also won the XBIZ award for Best New
Starlet and another AVN award the following year under the Best Star Showcase category.
183:
756:
criterion number 1. As long as criterion number 1 stands as is, biographies such as this one meet notability requirements.
375:. From one of the longest running Awards show and also one of the most distinguished awards given, after possibly AVN and
150:
862:
40:
765:
635:
570:
436:
332:
781:
as per everyone above - Has won significent & well known awards thus she meets PORNBIO #1 as well as GNG. –
603:
144:
684:
591:
813:
794:
773:
744:
667:
643:
620:
607:
578:
560:
539:
497:
472:
444:
426:
408:
391:
358:
336:
316:
309:
291:
284:
261:
254:
235:
228:
209:
140:
63:
858:
711:
663:
506:
493:
404:
387:
205:
36:
595:
707:
659:
525:
The award wins may be significant, but IMDb profiles and IAFD film counts don't establish notability.
502:
489:
383:
328:
190:
58:
753:
728:
587:
485:
345:
599:
176:
732:
680:
556:
85:
636:
The Big Bad
Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006.
571:
The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006.
437:
The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006.
535:
468:
417:
Then what is the point of even having the SNG if it can be bypassed by editors at their whim?
304:
279:
249:
223:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
857:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
422:
400:
354:
201:
156:
740:
53:
782:
586:
per Danger having won both AVN, XRCO, and XBIZ's Best New Starlet awards which passes
803:
552:
77:
69:
617:
531:
464:
373:
NightMoves Awards of 2016, in which she won Best Female Performer - Editor’s Choice
704:
This in turn led to the Announcement of the AVN winners on the Award winners site.
115:
481:
461:
418:
368:
350:
759:
736:
592:
straw poll determining which awards should be considered covered under PORNBIO
377:
also XRCO, where she also won an award in the New Starlet category.
435:
Failing GNG and BLP requirements is hardly an example of whimsy.
851:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
327:
does not meet our inclusion criteria for pornographic actresses.
244:
list of United States of America-related deletion discussions
833:
218:
list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions
111:
107:
103:
175:
189:
802:- Davey's response was concise and to the point.
367:I would like to add to the statement provided by
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
865:). No further edits should be made to this page.
699:agree that she meets the minimum requirements
8:
297:Note: This debate has been included in the
242:Note: This debate has been included in the
216:Note: This debate has been included in the
299:list of Women-related deletion discussions
296:
241:
215:
268:Note: This debate has been added to the
824:
616:of winners until sources can be found.
613:delete or redirect to a list of winners
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
590:. This was established back in a
1:
480:for the reasons explained by
460:for the reasons explained by
882:
814:22:33, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
795:19:01, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
774:02:22, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
745:23:26, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
716:19:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
689:17:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
668:18:37, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
644:12:08, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
621:16:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
608:21:00, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
579:18:28, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
561:04:16, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
540:02:21, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
498:18:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
473:12:24, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
445:18:18, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
427:19:27, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
409:16:49, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
392:22:51, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
359:11:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
337:19:39, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
317:17:57, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
292:17:55, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
262:17:47, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
236:17:47, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
210:17:35, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
64:15:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
854:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
270:WikiProject Pornography
594:and confirmed by the
515:few or no other edits
517:outside this topic.
596:AFD for Gracie Glam
727:. While she meets
772:
518:
329:John Pack Lambert
319:
273:list of deletions
264:
238:
873:
856:
842:
841:
829:
810:
807:
792:
787:
768:
762:
757:
500:
484:and stated here
314:
312:
307:
289:
287:
282:
276:
259:
257:
252:
233:
231:
226:
194:
193:
179:
131:
119:
101:
61:
56:
34:
881:
880:
876:
875:
874:
872:
871:
870:
869:
863:deletion review
852:
847:
846:
845:
831:
830:
826:
808:
805:
788:
783:
771:
766:
760:
551:As per GuzzyG.
310:
305:
303:
285:
280:
278:
267:
255:
250:
248:
229:
224:
222:
136:
127:
92:
76:
73:
60:| soliloquize _
59:
54:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
879:
877:
868:
867:
844:
843:
832:Malkova, Mia.
823:
822:
818:
817:
816:
797:
776:
764:
747:
721:
720:
719:
718:
692:
691:
673:
672:
671:
670:
649:
648:
647:
646:
624:
623:
610:
600:Morbidthoughts
581:
563:
545:
544:
543:
542:
520:
519:
475:
454:
453:
452:
451:
450:
449:
448:
447:
430:
429:
412:
411:
394:
362:
361:
339:
321:
320:
294:
265:
239:
197:
196:
133:
72:
67:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
878:
866:
864:
860:
855:
849:
848:
839:
835:
834:"Mia Malkova"
828:
825:
821:
815:
812:
811:
801:
798:
796:
793:
791:
786:
780:
777:
775:
769:
763:
755:
751:
748:
746:
742:
738:
734:
730:
726:
723:
722:
717:
713:
709:
705:
700:
696:
695:
694:
693:
690:
686:
682:
678:
675:
674:
669:
665:
661:
656:
651:
650:
645:
641:
637:
633:
630:
629:
628:
627:
626:
625:
622:
619:
614:
611:
609:
605:
601:
597:
593:
589:
585:
582:
580:
576:
572:
567:
564:
562:
558:
554:
550:
547:
546:
541:
537:
533:
528:
524:
523:
522:
521:
516:
512:
508:
504:
499:
495:
491:
487:
483:
479:
476:
474:
470:
466:
465:Glenn Francis
463:
459:
456:
455:
446:
442:
438:
434:
433:
432:
431:
428:
424:
420:
416:
415:
414:
413:
410:
406:
402:
398:
397:Clarification
395:
393:
389:
385:
382:
378:
374:
370:
366:
365:
364:
363:
360:
356:
352:
347:
343:
340:
338:
334:
330:
326:
323:
322:
318:
315:
313:
308:
300:
295:
293:
290:
288:
283:
274:
271:
266:
263:
260:
258:
253:
245:
240:
237:
234:
232:
227:
219:
214:
213:
212:
211:
207:
203:
192:
188:
185:
182:
178:
174:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
142:
139:
138:Find sources:
134:
130:
126:
123:
117:
113:
109:
105:
100:
96:
91:
87:
83:
79:
78:Abella Danger
75:
74:
71:
70:Abella Danger
68:
66:
65:
62:
57:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
853:
850:
837:
827:
819:
804:
799:
789:
784:
778:
749:
724:
703:
698:
681:Burroughs'10
676:
654:
631:
612:
583:
565:
548:
527:Nearly every
526:
477:
457:
396:
380:
376:
372:
341:
324:
306:CAPTAIN RAJU
302:
281:CAPTAIN RAJU
277:
251:CAPTAIN RAJU
247:
225:CAPTAIN RAJU
221:
198:
186:
180:
172:
165:
159:
153:
147:
137:
124:
49:
47:
31:
28:
708:Scenicview1
660:Scenicview1
530:years ago.
513:) has made
503:Scenicview1
490:Scenicview1
401:K.e.coffman
384:Scenicview1
202:K.e.coffman
163:free images
55:‑Scottywong
820:References
754:WP:PORNBIO
729:WP:PORNBIO
588:WP:PORNBIO
486:WP:PORNBIO
346:WP:PORNBIO
859:talk page
838:wikipedia
779:Snow Keep
733:WP:NOPAGE
677:Weak Keep
532:• Gene93k
37:talk page
861:or in a
553:Freikorp
511:contribs
122:View log
39:or in a
632:Comment
618:Spartaz
169:WP refs
157:scholar
95:protect
90:history
725:Delete
566:Delete
482:GuzzyG
462:GuzzyG
419:GuzzyG
371:, the
369:GuzzyG
351:GuzzyG
325:Delete
141:Google
99:delete
785:Davey
761:Godsy
737:Spshu
184:JSTOR
145:books
129:Stats
116:views
108:watch
104:links
16:<
809:5969
806:Onel
800:Keep
790:2010
767:CONT
750:Keep
741:talk
712:talk
685:talk
664:talk
655:each
640:talk
604:talk
584:Keep
575:talk
557:talk
549:Keep
536:talk
507:talk
494:talk
478:Keep
469:talk
458:KEEP
441:talk
423:talk
405:talk
388:talk
379:She
355:talk
342:Keep
333:talk
206:talk
177:FENS
151:news
112:logs
86:talk
82:edit
50:keep
488:.
311:(✉)
286:(✉)
256:(✉)
230:(✉)
191:TWL
120:– (
52:.
836:.
758:—
743:)
731:,
714:)
697:I
687:)
666:)
642:)
606:)
598:.
577:)
559:)
538:)
509:•
501:—
496:)
471:)
443:)
425:)
407:)
390:)
357:)
335:)
301:.
246:.
220:.
208:)
171:)
114:|
110:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
88:|
84:|
840:.
770:)
739:(
710:(
683:(
662:(
638:(
602:(
573:(
555:(
534:(
505:(
492:(
467:(
439:(
421:(
403:(
386:(
353:(
331:(
275:.
204:(
195:)
187:·
181:·
173:·
166:·
160:·
154:·
148:·
143:(
135:(
132:)
125:·
118:)
80:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.