Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raven Riley

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. JYolkowski // talk 22:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Raven Riley

Article as it stands right now does make a valid argument for her to be considered notable as per WP:BIO and the WP:PORN BIO proposed guidelines. Tabercil 22:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. I really don't see how she's notable either. It seems to me that Raven Riley is just another dime-a-dozen internet nude model. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud — WP:PORN BIO?} 02:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. If we apply the WP:PORN BIO standards, 8 DVD's available on her website don't come close to the required standard. There are just so many of these, that I don't see how you can single this one out as notable. Fan-1967 23:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. WP:PORN BIO, which is not policy, seems to be skewed towards "traditional" porn models and away from online models. No vote. 23skidoo 00:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• Don't Delete: Why would you? The DVD "required standard" stuff is antiquated. The girl is a legitimate sensation in that corner of cyberspace. Why NOT offer a bit of background information? Isn't that what reference materials are for? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.129.156.246 (talk • contribs) 20:27, July 27, 2006 (UTC)

• Don't Delete. 4,060,000 results at Google for a search on Raven Riley. I guess she must be of note. AND wikipedia comes in at number 5. Daskunt

• Don't Delete: She's notably Miss Nude Internet 2006! @ Miss Nude Internet website It would be senseless to delete her, as she's a well known adult internet celeb!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.189.193.148 (talk • contribs) 07:53, July 28, 2006 (UTC)

• Dont Delete: Keep it. She is one of the first online porn celebritys. She deserves to be kept.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.93.162.14 (talk • contribs) 01:29, July 28, 2006 (UTC)

• I do not see any reason to delete this. It is Raven Riley! How could she not be notable? A story of Raven can be found at http://xbiz.com/article_piece.php?cat=43&id=13859—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Obsidianor (talk • contribs) 22:58, July 28, 2006 (UTC)

• I don't know how to vote on this. Let me just give you some facts. She has no entry at imdb, so she doesn't seem to have any DVD sales of note. However, her name comes up with over 2,500,000 Google hits when done right. And her ravenriley.com website has an alexa ranking of 17,000. So that does show some notability. No vote. User:Zoe|^(talk) 03:08, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

• Don't Delete: Who is being petty about this and nominating it for deletion anyway?? This chick is definately top tier and is notable enough to have a damn entry christ...205.188.116.9 20:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  • The question here is "Why should Raven have an entry?" After all Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information - that's why there's a notability requirement for all biographies. Will Smith the janitor from Noweheresville, USA may be well liked and have fans for his work, but he does not have an entry; Will Smith the actor does. Tabercil 22:31, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

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.