Deletion of Nadine Jansen

Comment: Not only is there no evidence of ''significant coverage'' by independent |reliable sources - a requirement of the |general notability guideline and the basic criterion given in the |specific criteria for people (of which the criteria for |pornographic actors is part) but there doesn't appear to be ''any'' coverage by |reliable sources at all. The current article is copy pasted from an older version but it only gives apparently unreliable sources such as IMDb as well as obscure, unreliable, non-NN|notable pornographic websites and magazines including http://www.amontillado.it/ and Voluptuous Magazine. Whilst I have to admit I am not familiar with these publications I would imagine that the information contained within them is designed more to titillate rather than to be an accurate source for a ''high quality'' encyclopaedia - I can find no evidence that any of the sources have a reputation for fact checking and accuracy. This a |biography of a living person, the fact that the individual works in a industry from which individuals do not receive a lot of mainstream - or other reliable - coverage does not change the fact that no |reliable sources should mean no article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:NN||WP:BIO||WP:PORNBIO||WP:RS||WP:BLP||WP:RS)