Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cate Harrington

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:38, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cate Harrington (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Subject does not meet WP:PORNBIO or WP:GNG. Coverage is extremely minimal and per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carmel Moore (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie Brooks (actress) (2nd nomination), UK Adult Film and Television Awards is not a qualifying criteria for WP:PORNBIO. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 00:23, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 September 13. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:51, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:03, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:52, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:52, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom's accurate analysis and per the case made in my original PROD. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 10:35, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom - fails pornbio & gng. –Davey2010^Talk 00:12, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete does not pass notability guidelines for pornographic actresses.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:03, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:WHYN -- no meaningful biographical content or RS. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:12, 14 September 2016 (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.