Rachel Roxxx ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( XfD| restore)

OK, the last real AFD was in April 2008, since that, every new article was deleted speedly. I think the admins make huge mistake, even if she has only one nomination, she is really popular in the industry. So I propose a new AFD-discussion with all arguments! Just google Rachel Roxxx to see the relevance, I know this is not much relevant, but in this case it is really informative. Since April 2008 have gone 2 and 1/2 years, and she is very active in the industry...She played in Big Tits at School 1&2 (award-winning - Best Big Bust release), and This Ain't Cheaters XXX (best known Hustler-series). She has 45 scenes on Brazzers, one of the biggest internet porn sites, behind Shyla Stylez (51) she has the most scenes on this site. This person has 6 international wikis and 35 pics on Wiki Commons. She has +100 articles on AVN.com and worked for all big companies. Only if you hold straight on the Wikipedia:PORNBIO and don´t think outside the box, she is not relevant for en.wiki. Greets -- Hixteilchen ( talk) 22:58, 12 November 2010 (UTC) reply

• Endorse - WP:PORNBIO is a lower standard that the general notability guideline; it is there to provide an easier-to-meet threshold for pornstars to meet and thus get Wikipedia articles. If this person cannot even reach the lowest of the low-hanging fruit, then there's nothing else for us to do. Tarc ( talk) 23:44, 12 November 2010 (UTC) reply
• Endorse until actual reliable sources are provided that meet WP:N or at least clearly meet WP:PORNBIO. The AfD is clearly closed correctly and barring reliable sources the article should remain deleted. Hobit ( talk) 01:49, 13 November 2010 (UTC) reply
• Restore - If you don´t accept sources like AVN.com it´s difficult to show the relevance for the porn industy. And my opinion is she passes Wikipedia:PORNBIO point 3 in groundbreaking or blockbuster feature Big Tits at School and This Ain´t Cheaters. If you have another oppinion, I want a clear definition what is meant with groundbreaking or blockbuster feature. Nevertheless she has a huge popularity around the world and in the industry and deserves an article. -- Hixteilchen ( talk) 13:00, 13 November 2010 (UTC) reply
  • Can you change this to a comment as your nomination is taken as a vote and you are not allowed to vote twice. And yes there are issues with AVN which means you need better sources. If you don't have them then the subject remains unsourced so I Endorse the deletion. Spartaz ^Humbug! 13:06, 13 November 2010 (UTC) reply
• Note that immediately after the deletion of this page the user recreated the article at Abby_Brooks in order to circumvent the AFD/G4. This was before they raised this DRV, which was their next action. Spartaz ^Humbug! 13:12, 13 November 2010 (UTC) reply
• Endorse I saw the version that had been deleted and as I said in the summary, there was nothing that would indicate the subject was notable. And a side note to Tarc: true PORNBIO is probably lower than GNG, but IMO it's a higher standard than ANYBIO because it requires nominations in successive years. Tabercil ( talk) 15:54, 13 November 2010 (UTC) reply
• Endorse It may be possible to create an article for the subject that establishes notability, but the reliable and verifiable sources that would be needed to meet the notability standard have not been demonstrated and speedy deletion was appropriate at this point. Alansohn ( talk) 14:59, 15 November 2010 (UTC) reply
• Overturn, reluctantly, and send to AFD. As I noted when I recently PRODded this article, the claim of an award nomination received after the original AFD is an entirely new claim of significance sufficient to survive G4. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk) 15:04, 17 November 2010 (UTC) reply
• Wait. Enough to survive G4, but since this article has been deleted lots of times (7 times including the ones created under Rachel Roxx) is not a matter a re-creating the article again and again every time we have news about the character. I have create the article under my userpage here: User:Neo139/Rachel_Roxxx. Feel free to edit there. When the article shows enough notability with proper references, we will ask some admins to reconsider recreating this article.-- Neo139 ( talk) 00:09, 18 November 2010 (UTC) reply