Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kelly Madison (3rd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 19:05, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Madison[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I think.its time we had another look at this. Previously kept for reasons that would not cut the mustard now, the only recent sourcing relates to allegations about her husband! For BLP reasons I am astonished that we publish allegations about her role in her husband's scandal but don't have an article on him. Since the only sourced material is as an accesory to her husband this feels.like a do no harm case. Suggest we redirect to the relevant hall of fame article. News had nothing about her and first 5 pages of goggle were links to sites advertising her videos. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:47, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. 🌸 1.Ayana 🌸 (talk) 22:35, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. 🌸 1.Ayana 🌸 (talk) 22:35, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Notability is not temporary, she clearly had a notable career before this mess with her husband, which should be trimmed per COATRACK. HouseOfChange (talk) 23:20, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability standards change so ancient previous discussions really have no bearing. 13 years ago we kept everything if they were good looking. Thank goodness we are beyond that. Remove the stuff about her husband and what is actually left about her that meets today's standards? What sources do you think are adequate. I couldn't find any. Spartaz ^Humbug! 23:32, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Having read the 2 previous AfD discussions, this article was not kept because she was pretty but because she met several categories of WP:PORNBIO (now deprecated) but she clearly meets WP:ENT #2 and #3. I look forward to learning from other editors who are more experienced with porn/entertainer biographies. HouseOfChange (talk) 23:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and move to Pornfidelity or Kelly Madison Media as most coverage/content is about the activities of their production company rather than the person.[1][2][3] Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:57, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:24, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:24, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this pornographic performer does not meet any reasonable inclusion criteria.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:03, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Morbidthoughts (talk) 20:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:44, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As noted, standards change over time. All of the Xbix, AVN cites are irrelevant, as are the awards. Other coverage is more of Ryan Madison's assault allegations tan of the subject. Zaathras (talk) 12:00, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: does not meet WP:ENT / WP:BASIC. Beyond that, the sources offered above, such as "A New Wave of Reckoning Is Sweeping the Porn Industry", is about reports of abuse on porn sets by the subject's husband, and not suitable for establishing notability. --K.e.coffman (talk) 03:42, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Significant RS coverage is about the accusations against the subject's husband. Porn trade press coverage are repackaged press releases, company announcements or interviews. WP:BASIC failure. Porn awards without independent RS coverage don't count for WP:ENT notability. Kelly Madison also does not inherit notability for having a notorious husband. • Gene93k (talk) 07:42, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am striking my Keep vote above based on later comments by users with more experience than I have. I had assumed the coverage and awards were significant. HouseOfChange (talk) 16:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (I change my vote to delete because you are insisting on putting up information that doesn't belong on her page. So unfortunate) Ryan Madison has since refuted these allegations here "ryanmadison.com" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Treypro (talk • contribs) 20:13, 31 August 2020 (UTC) — Treypro (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

@Treypro: You just removed all the content about the allegations as inappropriate and damaging. I hope you also realize that you just removed the only content with non-trivial citations to independent reliable sources, and those were mainly about the subject's husband. Take away the controversy, the article is left with press releases, interviews and other non-independent sources. • Gene93k (talk) 22:49, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gene93k: Everything about these false allegations should be removed from Kelly's page. These accusations can be so damaging to someones life? They proved the allegations to be false with real video, audio and screenshots not just hearsay at ryanmadison.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Treypro (talk • contribs) 13:35, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Personal claims made via edited videos hosted on one's personal website are not in any way exculpatory, no. The bright side is that within a few days, the article will almost certainly be deleted, thus your concerns will be taken care of. Zaathras (talk) 22:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not pass WP:GNG as most of the reliable sources are covering her husband, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 00:46, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Obviously she has a notable career. She’s ran a successful company for over 20 years and has a huge website KellyMadison.com that has won multiple awards. She has also made a lot of dvd/movies that have won awards that are not listed here. Also a writer in a published magazine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silversix6 (talk • contribs) 15:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note, the above comment is, at this time, the first and only contribution to the Wikipedia by this editor. Zaathras (talk) 23:49, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm just not seeing the multiple independent published sources dealing extensively with the subject necessary for a GNG pass. Carrite (talk) 02:36, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.