Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/April O'Neil (actress) (2nd nomination)

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.

April O'Neil (actress)

April O'Neil (actress) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG.--NL19931993 (talk) 02:57, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:49, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:49, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• FYI. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/April O'Neil (pornographic actress). Gleeanon409 (talk) 10:02, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. Hyperbolick (talk) 15:19, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a non-notable pornographic entertainer. This is one of the types of categories we need to clean out a lot of articles on.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:28, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I'm not sure why this is tagged for bands and musicians (which is my expertise) but I'll weigh in anyway. Reliable source (Rolling Stone, LA Weekly, etc) mentions in lists are trivial so don't add up to mainstream notability, but the subject's nominations/wins of a major industry awards plus extensive IMDB credits seems to meet WP:ENT criteria, especially with five-years worth of additions (not in article but confirmed by Googling) since the previous "no consensus" AfD debate from 2014. ShelbyMarion (talk) 00:23, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: does not meet
  WP:SPIP. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:43, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep - Passes the GNG with these articles about her and her works.[1][2][3][4] and passes
  WP:CREATIVE as director/writer given her collective body of work receiving coverage [5][6][7][8] Morbidthoughts (talk) 06:42, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Morbidthoughts (talk) 15:31, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Per above and
  WP:BASIC, that If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability. Subject gets plenty of non-trivial mentions in good quality RS per the article (like Rolling Stone), and Morbidthoughts above, and in RS such as Vice. It is actually tricky to get RS on porn actresses as you have to wade through the multitude of porn-sites on google. Britishfinance (talk) 11:03, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Move to draft. It has been suggested that new sources exist beyond those in the article. If so, let those be added, and the article can be submitted through the AFC process.
  T
  04:22, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
• Delete since subject fails
  WP:ENT. (We should remember that WP:PORNBIO is no more. See here
  .)

The only criterion of WP:ENT that our subject could possibly meet is #1 (significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions), since she evidently does not qualify on the basis of the others, i.e. #2 & #3 (large fan base or a significant "cult" following & unique, prolific or innovative contributions, respectively).

How would the films in which our subject has participated could qualify as "notable"? The only criterion of

porn industry respectively (even when the cited source that labels those awards as such is a defunct one). Ergo, we have no notability of which to speak. -The Gnome (talk) 14:33, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

• Changing suggestion to Keep on the basis of subject's notability about activities not directly related to porn, e.g. here, here, etc. On porn alone she does not cut it, but there's indeed more. -The Gnome (talk) 18:37, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Per the sources identified by
  notability. It would be good to see the article get expanded though... — Hunter Kahn 18:22, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep, Per all the sources identified pass subject to GNG. Gleeanon409 (talk) 19:39, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete There is just no evidence of achieved notability. Simple as that. The LA Weekly thing is speculative at best. Trillfendi (talk) 21:47, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• What do you mean "speculative"? It appears to be a full profile about her in a verifiable, reliable secondary source... one of several sources available about her (both shared in this AFD and otherwise) that seem to contradict your claim of "no evidence of achieved notability"... — Hunter Kahn 23:53, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I’m definitely talking about the article where they claim she and 9 others can be the “next” Sasha Grey, if that wasn’t obvious. That’s not an accomplishment. And clearly it hasn’t actually happened that she will have reached Grey’s popularity and mainstream success.... This is exactly why PORNBIO was depreciated and awards aren’t enough anymore. Trillfendi (talk) 17:05, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I thought you were referring to this LA Weekly article, which is a full profile entirely dedicated to her and discusses her past, how she began in the adult film industry, how she came to establish her name and unique niche in the industry, and a great deal of other content. I think by focusing on the "next Sasha Gray" thing you are highlighting only one brief sentence/headline in a single article and ignoring the rest of a body of work that helps establish her notability. And even the article you reference includes more than just the "next Sasha Gray" thing, including information about her past, her social media influence, etc. — Hunter Kahn 17:43, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia article itself only says how she got her stage name then lists a smattering of awards/nominations. While it’s good she has a real article on her—that’s more you can say for most adult actresses these days—I don’t demonstrably see a noteworthy career here, in my opinion. Trillfendi (talk) 22:34, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that if we were going by the content on the Wikipedia article as it stands right now, that might not be enough. But this AFD discussion has identified a number of reliable sources that provide more information about her and establish notability. The article should and likely will be expanded to include this new info; I'll happily add it myself once things get a little less busy due to the holidays... — Hunter Kahn 14:11, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep - I can see her winning a non notable award and see her winning a notable award. Per
  WP:ANYBIO winning just one notable award should suffice or show evidence of notability. Am I missing something? Please correct me and I’d promptly change my vote to a delete if not then a Keep is most applicable here. Celestina007 (talk) 03:06, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Greetings,

Wikinotable for endeavors not strictly related to porn, as shown above (e.g. here). Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 10:48, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

The Gnome ah! that explains a lot. Thanks for the clarification. Celestina007 (talk) 10:52, 27 December 2019 (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.