Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Micky Lynn

Source: 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 was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:51, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Micky Lynn (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)

Fails WP:BASIC and WP:ENT: the current sources are a puff-piece AVN profile/interview and a short, promotional bio of Ms. Lynn in an AVN award listing; please note that porn industry awards no longer count towards anything now that PORNBIO has been deprecated. I looked for additional sources and found only trivial or promotional coverage such as cast lists and event billings. Cheers, gnu57 22:39, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. gnu57 22:39, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. gnu57 22:39, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. gnu57 22:39, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. gnu57 22:39, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:45, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is yet another case of someone who seems to have had a potentially significant career in the pre-digital era but has an extreme lack of digitally available sources (nor the ability to verify that any others exist). It's quite possible an article could be written if someone had access to the right sources from that era, but as we don't have access to enough WP:RS to even attempt to write an article it's a clear delete at this stage. The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:48, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 00:40, 28 February 2020 (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.