Deletion of Capri Anderson (2nd nomination)

Comment: As the nominator of the original AfD, I feel her multiple nominations establish notability beyond just that one event. Not only is PORNBIO is satisfied, so is . The criteria flaw that the current nominator sees is apparent in ANYBIO but I don't see him arguing against ANYBIO
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ANYBIO)

Comment: the pornbio stuff (alleged notability because of industry award nominations) is irrelevant, and as several others have said, the wording in PORNBIO simply doesn't reflect current project-wide standards. If it's not formally deprecated yet, let's deprecate it here and now, by demonstrating how we ignore it. For everything else in the article, the -based decision of the old AfD still applies. Thus no reason to revise the old decision
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: The Sheen incident fails  (and is not mentioned at Charlie Sheen, so a redirect there would not be helpful). The porn award nominations do not convey notability, and the  guideline is too disputed to reflect community consensus. Nothing else appears to make the subject notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:PORNBIO)

Comment: to Charlie Sheen - fails  and  - a standard . Arguments that she meets  should be ignored, as pornbio is depreciated
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ANYBIO||WP:ENT||WP:BLP1E||WP:PORNBIO)

Comment: as per above to Charlie Sheen. Now, I also think that  applies as well - She is in the early days of what might end up being quite a career. So, when she wins those AVN awards or otherwise becomes notable, then an article would be appropriate. Put another way, would we be discussing her at all if it were not for the Charlie Sheen thing
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Usual caveats (WP:USUAL)