Deletion of Kimberly Franklin (2nd nomination)

Comment: Nowhere in  does it say that having "any video named after them" is a criterion. The criterion is quite specific that it be an original film, not a compilation. Franklin has a compilation with her name in the title, not an original film. The article meets Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion #7 under the Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Articles|Articles section in that it fails to assert the importance or significance of its subject. (The article can't be nominated for speedy deletion any longer because of the previous AfD. The only information in the article that is sourced is her year and place of birth, her height, and her half-sister's name. The only other information available at the source listed (her IMDb profile) is her videography. All of the other information in the article fails Wikipedia:Verifiability.&mdash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PORNBIO)

Comment: I am open to being convinced otherwise, but since the issue at hand from the original nomination was her meeting the criteria set in .  After research and tedious debate, she does not.  To everyone who says the standard needs to be changed if you don't like it, we have tons of discussion going on in the talk page of PORNBIO. If consensus changes such that she becomes notable under them, then I will be the first to say keep her
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PORNBIO)

Comment: Although this article technically fails , the real reason to delete it is because it is crap. Poorly written, unreferenced, uninformative, overtly perverse, irredeemable crap. ˉˉ
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PORNBIO)

Comment: and delete  while we're at it-porn stars should be the same as everyone else, they pass  and they stay or they fail it and go. This particular one doesn't even pass either, however
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PORNBIO||WP:BIO)