Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dora Venter (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.

The result was no consensus.

Dora Venter

Relisted due to disruption of previous AFD Will (message me!) 15:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See also previous nomination: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dora Venter. Thank you, Sceptre! gidonb 20:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong delete Unworthy of an article here. Matthew Fenton (contribs) 15:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete does not meet the standard of
  WP:PORN BIO. Eluchil404 15:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Weak Keep - per
  talk • contribs
  )
• Very Weak Keep and Expand. In its current stub form, the article makes little effort to assert her notability. However, according to afdb, she has performed in a little over 70 films, which almost qualifies
  WP:PORN BIO. Is there anything notable about her that has been missed? -Seidenstud 16:51, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Strong delete she clearly does not meet the treshold. There are heavy weighting reasons why the treshold was not set low. See discussion on the relevant talk page. gidonb 17:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete So she's a porno actor in Hungary. That appears to be the only information on her, and she fails
  WP:PORN BIO's criterion of 100 movies at IAFD. She only has 84 titles, five of which are listed as compilations. Ryulong 19:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • NO! I can add much more info about her!!! I'm just waiting for the AfD to be over. --Haham hanuka 20:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Uhh...wouldn't it make sense to add it now so that maybe this article would have a better chance at survival? Metros232 20:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Where does "almost" allow us to bypass a guideline? Neither imdb nor afdb lists 100 films, nor does the article explain how failing that threshhold, she is notable enough for an article about her to be kept. Should somebody come up with a notability criterion, then I would reassess my discussion. User:Zoe|^(talk) 22:25, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Haham hanuka has been trying to push the AfD to go in his direction by advertising it at user talk pages: Jackys cy's and Seidenstud's, specifically. Ryulong 23:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete As I stated in my previous AfD this actress does NOT meet
  Wildthing61476 01:42, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment As an additional note, there is a link in the author talk page from an admin that has previously deleted the article for non-notability. This would fall under a CSD for recreation of a deleted article.
  Wildthing61476 01:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Comment. This has been deleted on four different occassions, see the block log here [3]. All of them were speedy deletions though and speedy deletes recreated don't qualify as reposts. I saw let this AfD decide this article's fate once and for all. Metros232 02:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• keep please she is notable and in over 80 films Yuckfoo 06:54, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Yeah, but the
    WP:PORN BIO criteria says that the actor/actress should have at least 100. Ryulong 09:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Comment: No, it does not. See my comment below or join the discussion at
      WP:PORN BIO. RFerreira 00:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply
      ]
• Delete. Just another european porn star. -- GWO
• Delete - nn porn star. --WinHunter ^(talk) 11:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. One of the accepted
  WP:PORN BIO criteria for inclusion is "Performer has been in around or over 100 movies" (emphasis mine). After combining the list of titles from IAFD, IMDB, and AFDB and removing duplicates you end up with approximately 90 unique films. This is an article about a career adult entertainer, not a vanity page on a teenaged girl who just figured out how to make money with her webcam. Seeing as she has appeared in around one hundred movies (ten shy) and is known within a specific niche, I see no valid reason why this article cannot be included. RFerreira 21:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep and expand. --Myles Long 00:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you explain why? User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sure. Basically, for the reason that RFerreira mentioned. 85 films definitely seems to be notable. --Myles Long 12:19, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Per http://www.excaliburfilms.com/pornlist/starpgs/Dora_Venter.htm she has over 120 films. That meets
  the behaviour of its primary author. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 16:25, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Expanded. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 17:51, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I reject
  WP:PORN BIO's 100-film threshold (it's not an official guideline, I'd like to point out). My threshold is 50. The article contains barely any info, but the creator has said more can be added (although the creator cannot do so now). This is a stub with room for expansion. Mangojuice^talk 17:25, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep, per User:RFerreira -- Ferkelparade π 18:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete completely generic porn "acrtress". No reliable sources, none likely to exist. Just zis Guy you know? 20:44, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Yet Another porn actress: nothing groundbreaking, famous (or infamous), or distinctive. --Calton | Talk 21:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. In lieu of AnonEMouse's excellent work, the article appears to be properly sourced and she is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, per
  WP:PORN BIO? 03:12, 20 July 2006 (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.