Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maxi Mounds
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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 speedy keep.
single purpose account unfamiliar with our notability standards. RFerreira 01:06, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply
]
Maxi Mounds
Was listed on Speedy Delete then removed. Requires discussion. Individual does not meet Wikipedia notability standards, is a minor pornographic star with little presence outside of personal internet site and mirrors. Recent activity may indicate article created as vanity by Maxi Mounds herself. Popular target for
Josh Whedon vandals linking to Wonder Woman (film) KingCobra666 03:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC) — KingCobra666 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply
]
- Re-speedy A7, G11, salt the earth against re-creation. Draw a line in the sand. Alba 04:08, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - That picture is from maximounds.com and is from a section in her site about Wonder Woman movie, e-mail porn stat yourself
- The above comment is from User:Maximounds. Alba 05:07, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I can't believe I'm participating in this, or voting to Keep, but a Guinness record would seem to be a "rather explicit" claim of notability. Alansohn 05:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep-Not another one of these! Colt 45, Chelsea Charms now Maxi Mounds? All these pages look alright and are viable
- Keep as a Guinness World Record holder, albeit in a category she pretty much seems to have convinced them to have specifically for the purposes. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 07:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep..... unfortunately. Khukri (talk . contribs) 12:02, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep notable, even if people would rather she wasn't. But then again, that is why we have those policies. --Maelnuneb (Talk) 19:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, Guinness records holder = third party reliable sources. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 21:41, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. She is a notable adult entertainer. -- Freemarket 23:37, 10 October 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.