Deletion of Jenna Haze

Comment: since subject fails . An editor claimed Haze is "really relevant for the twentieth century culture." Since this is indeed, if true, a most significant attribute, our fellow editor is invited to help the AfD process by providing |sources |supporting the veracity of their claim. |For my part, I could not unearth anything in the ''Britannica'', any ''Art in America'' back issues lying around, or the ''Philosophy Today'' archives
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACTOR||WP:RS||WP:V||WP:BEFORE)

Comment: Notability has already been established by the GA process. {{u|Morbidthoughts}} has proved that claims that the article fails  and  are unfounded. Another vexatious AfD from the anti-porn brigade
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NACTOR)

Comment: There's more than enough here to pass GNG. A couple of editors seem to be taking a position of "excluding sources discussing what she's notable for, she doesn't pass " which is not how that works
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per  based on sources found by others in this discussion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Congratulations for nominating a GA-class article for deletion.https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jenna_Haze&diff=187169223&oldid=187166246 Is this a first? Haze passes  given that CNBC wrote that she was "arguably the most popular performer in the porn" in 2011https://www.cnbc.com/2011/01/06/The-Dirty-Dozen:-Porns-Most-Popular-Stars.html?page=3 and was also rated as one of the 12 most popular porn actress in 2012https://www.cnbc.com/2012/01/18/The-Dirty-Dozen-2012:-Porns-Most-Popular-Stars.html?page=10. She has the following coverage passing the GNG.https://www.ocweekly.com/local-girl-gone-gonzo-6425250/https://www.ocweekly.com/porn-star-jenna-haze-dating-dillinger-escape-plans-greg-puciato-6603816/https://www.ocweekly.com/americas-porn-paradise-6425578/https://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/04/04/director-jenna-haze-not-down-with-the-bits/http://officemagazine.net/last-dancehttps://www.spidersweb.pl/2017/05/jenna-haze-pornhub-piractwo.html Her scenes have been the subject of academic criticism.http://ojs.unica.it/index.php/between/article/view/2152/2127http://www.asaeca.org/imagofagia/index.php/imagofagia/article/view/1673/1371https://www.rivisteweb.it/doi/10.7372/71093 Oh, she has also won the usual multiple awards and hall of fame status that triggered the nomination, evidence toward  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ENTERTAINER||WP:ANYBIO||WP:ENTERTAINER)

Comment: for lack of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. The fact that the article is GA is not material to notability. In any case, the article was promoted in 2008 when the standards were much more lax. For example, most citatitions are from promotional industry publications (), non RS web sites, IMDB, and so on. Arguments such as  are not helpful in deletion discussions. The annual listicles from a CNBC journalist (?) do not provide significant coverage for the subject: https://www.cnbc.com/2011/01/06/The-Dirty-Dozen:-Porns-Most-Popular-Stars.html?page=3. I'm not seeing notability here under  / 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SPIP||WP:INTERESTING||WP:BIO||WP:ENT)

Comment: Article fails both  and , with almost all sources being porn mags. Inclusion in a list alongside many others and a single sentence does not qualify as a "significant cult following". The sources provided above are not reliable, with the exception of one, which is not enough to pass GNG
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NACTOR)

Comment: If the best source I can find is a tabloid journalism piece explaining her association with Tiffany Trump, then that's just not good enough -  takes priority
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLPSOURCES)