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 delete with the new sources not judged to demonstrate notability. Barkeep49 ( talk) 00:40, 18 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Lana Rhoades (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Deletion review came to the conclusion that the newly provided sources ( https://www.xbiz.com/news/246121/op-ed-heres-what-happened-with-the-mia-khalifa-interview https://fortune.com/2018/01/24/most-popular-adult-film-stars/ https://www.bosshunting.com.au/culture/lana-rhoades-exclusive https://avn.com/business/articles/video/lana-rhoades-discusses-porn-debut-669399.html https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-sexual-coercion-epidemic-in-porn) need to be discussed. This is a procedural nomination; personally I have no opinion. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 07:24, 10 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 07:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 07:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 07:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 07:56, 10 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 07:56, 10 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 07:56, 10 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 07:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• Delete. The Daily Beast article is the only source that meets the reliable, independent and significant coverage standard. The XBIZ article is an op-ed that only briefly mentions the subject. The Forbes listicle article is not significant coverage, and interviews don't count as independent. Comes up short on WP:BASIC and WP:ENT, and then now-superseded WP:PORNBIO SNG didn't prevail in the 2017 AfD. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:40, 10 September 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete. The original AFD got this exactly right. There is virtually no reliable independent sourcing available, and the new sourcing, as Gene93k accurately points out, is hardly any better. The Forbes piece is clickbait from an outside source (it used to run at CNBC as "The Dirty Dozen") and was typically drawn heavily from Wikipedia articles. The Daily Beast source is a commentary by a retired porn performer, not an independent journalist, and the content regarding Rhoades is skimpy and buried deep in the piece and provides virtually no information useful in writing a BLP. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. ( talk) 20:46, 10 September 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete not enough reliable indepdent sourcing to show notability. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 06:47, 15 September 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.