Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tsubomi (actress)
: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. Courcelles (talk) 21:57, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
=[[Tsubomi (actress)]]=
:{{la|Tsubomi (actress)}} – (
:({{Find sources AFD|Tsubomi (actress)}})
Films winning awards does not mean the actors win. The AV Actress of the year does not appear to be a proper award but rather an X-rated japanese equivilent of a FHM type chart. In short. lacks RS and fails PORNBIO Spartaz Humbug! 20:35, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:43, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —☮JAaron95 Talk 05:50, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. Tsubomi is one of the most famous AV idols. The actress of the year award is indeed the equivalent of an AVN award (more prestigious, in fact, since Japan has far fewer such awards). She is also the subject of a short documentary by VICE (a mainstream RS):[http://www.tokyokinky.com/tsubomi-documentary-vice-japan/]. (Hit the CC button in the video player for English subtitles.) --Sammy1339 (talk) 22:42, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per nom's accurate assessment. The claimed "actress of the year" award fails the "well knowm/significant" standard of PORNBIO -- it isn't even mentioned, for example, in Pornography in Japan or even in the article on Weekly Playboy itself (looking at both the en-wiki and ja-wiki versions). Weekly Playboy, btw, isn't the Japanese version of the notable mag, but an entirely different publication of far lower stature. In the absence of significant RS coverage, there's no basis for keeping a promotionally sourced BLP (and that single online clip, which the cited page says "doesn’t go into any context or explore anything properly" falls well below the necessary level of coverage. I mean, if "tokyokinky.com" finds the coverage substandard, it's not going to be good enough for Wikipedia. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 12:19, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
{{clear}}
: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.