Deletion of Amia Miley

Comment: You cannot simply add up a bunch of passing/trivial mentions in sources and declare  to be met, and quite frankly it is embarrassing to see someone put that forth as a genuine argument.  A porn industry award is not in any way, shape, or form a "well-known and significant award or honor", so  is a failure.  Multiple nominations are explicitly ruled out by  as well, so as the subject meets none of the project's thresholds of notability, delete
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:ANYBIO||WP:PORNBIO)

Comment: Fails , , and . —&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PORNBIO||WP:BIO||WP:GNG)

Comment: Passing mention in a number of news sources (Vanity Fair etc) for roles in a TV show http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/07/true-detective-rachel-mcadams-orgy as a major talent in the adult industry http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/true-detective-porn-stars-amia-miley-782688 and passing mentions for small role in a popular short film http://www.ctvnews.ca/entertainment/power-rangers-morph-into-gritty-adults-in-hit-fan-film-1.2252835 Last time I checked fan films dont have their own wikipedia pages Power/Rangers aren't directed by notable directors Joseph Kahn and produced by the backers of major motion pictures Adi Shankar. Also per  criteria 1 ('has been nominated for one several times'); awards that are well known and notable enough to have their own Wikipedia pages should be well known and significant enough to meet the criteria of 'well known.' Combination of multiple non-in depth mentions and noms meets  basic criteria/additional criteria
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ANYBIO||WP:BIO)