Deletion of Kimberly Evenson

Comment: Looking at Wikipedia:PEOPLE#Pornographic_actors, it lists receiving an award from Playboy as a reason to assert notability. ''however'' being Playmate of the Month is not an award by any standard. All these persons are already listed at Playmate, and many of these person's articles should be deleted, like Lesa_Ann_Pedriana who has even less assertion of notability than this person. Saying that  is not an argument to keep an article. This article fails notability ''on its own'' and ought to be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS)

Comment: Why just ''this'' one, out of the hundreds of Playmate articles? Nominator's article as a "porn staradult model" is superficial and is reminiscent of 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: Needs to meet notability guidelines per  and needs independent, reliable, and verifiable sourcing per .  his article does not have it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:BLP)

Comment: Please notice that altought some pages say "Playboy Playmate of the Year Award"http://www.whedon.info/Charisma-Carpenter-2004-Playboy,6071.html, Playboy itself doesn't mention it ''anywhere'' as an actual award, and it only says that it gives prizes to the girls chosen as Playmate of the Year, so it wouldn't pass  because it's *not* an award (please provide sources from Playbot itself saying that it's an award). Notice the Playboy's page about choosing Playmateshttp://www.playboy.com/help/posing2.html, being a Playmate is just a model job. They should all be listed on the Playmate page unless they are notable of their own
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PORNBIO)

Comment: zero independent reliable sources cited.  and derivatives are inclusion guidelines that indicate the type of person who will usually have sufficient independent coverage to allow a policy-compliant article.  An indication that the person is likely to have such coverage, is not in and of itself evidence of such coverage.  We cannot have a policy-compliant biography of a living individual without non-trivial independent sources even if they have appeared on the front cover of ''Melons Monthly'' or whatever
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)