Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holly Heartbreak

From 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 of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 02:54, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Holly Heartbreak

A non-notable porn star (NSFW!) whose only claim to..ahem.."fame" is that she posted pictures of herself nude during pregnancy. Not the first or anything, she just did it... Delete. JHMM13 (T | C) 07:31, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete as nn. Too weird. Getting off-subject, the servers aren't letting any anons create new pages. I just signed off, tried to edit and got a notice saying it was locked out. No ownder we've been getting bombarded by first-time users with such bizarre edits! - Lucky 6.9 07:35, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete - I can't see how taking pictures of herself pregnant is anything new or unusual. Didn't Demi Moore do that? And also Elle MacPherson? Its been done to death. Not remotely new, if that is her stake for fame. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 08:26, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete - After reading the comments by other users it appears that there is not a desire for this kind of article. Request speedy deletion on the grounds that the original author, being the only person to have edited the page, asks for its removal. I sincerely apologise for this misaction I have apparently taken in trying to improve the encyclopedia. I simply modeled my article out of others which appear under the same category. I still fail to understand how this article differs from others of the same nature - Next Door Nikki's inclusion, for example - and if someone can point me at an appropriate article to read up further on these issuses then I would appreciate it.AlexG2490 14:23, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
    • How on Earth does "developing a category of authors of pornography" translate into "writing articles about pornographic models"?

      Wikipedia isn't a directory of people. It's an encyclopaedia. We have Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion of biographies. Heads of state, actors, politicians, musicians, and whatnot qualify for articles here because (simply) people other than they themselves go to the effort of publishing non-trivial works about them. Such people are the subjects of independent, third-party, magazine "in depth" articles, news coverage, biographies, books, documentaries, and so forth. On the other hand, for Holly Heartbreak there is, basically, nothing at all. This isn't surprising. She works in an industry where information about the models themselves is deliberately kept secret, and most blurbs and biographies are works of fiction.

      The article cites no sources, and no reliable sources of actual biographical information about this person can be found (in amongst thousands of Googlebombs, advertisements, and "come-on" pages telling us things such as that she is "spunky and more than you can handle"). This article is unverifiable. Delete. Uncle G 01:34, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete -- nonnotable web porn star. We'll start negotiations when she gets in Penthouse and/or makes the news for doing something stupid in public like Melissa Harrington aka Melissa Midwest. Haikupoet 05:49, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
    • I loved this comment. So if we do something stupid in public then we get our own article? LOL. Just how stupid do you need to be to get your own article? :) I keep thinking of Paris Hilton when I think of stupid in public... Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 03:23, 9 December 2005 (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.