This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
Latest comment: 10 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Although I just took my time now to read the whole discussion today on the previous nomination. I can see this was discussed around 28th August 2022. I actually don't know how the previous article looks like and can't figure out who created it but I believe the census on the discussion gave their opinion on how the article was written previously. Also I figured out after the deletion of the subject on the 28th of August 2022 they have been more achievement from the subject such as notability from newspapers, movies being seen and award being won/nomination aside from the movie she was starred which won an award. Although I'm not perfect, just speaking from what have learnt from wikipedia when writing articles so am just gonna leave this for a reviewer to check the past and the newer version. Meligirl5 (talk) 02:07, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Meligirl5: The several of the new draft's references are new. However, most of them don't advance the case for notability. By the numbers: 1. IAFD - neither reliable nor substantial. 2–6. Interviews and press releases are primary sources, substantially based on what the subject says. They don't contribute to notability. 7. This Day: A puff piece, but it's the only plausible non-trivial secondary source coverage in the draft. 8–13. No substantial change from 2022. Porn awards do not establish notability, and nominations count for even less. Besides, two of those citations are self-published. At the very least, the subject needs non-trivial, intellectually independent coverage like #7 from sources also independent of #7 (This Day). A submission would likely be declined, but the draft is improving. • Gene93k (talk) 03:25, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 10 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello @Vanderwaalforces, thanks for your review. Although have been busy this Christmas season with my family reason why I haven’t been able to edit. I just made an adjustment per your comment review. I was able to research some of the reliable references that mentioned about her date of birth which are reference number 1 & 17th. They were many more but I feel the newspaper are more reliable. Also for the Awards I just added two more reliable sources. Merry Christmas to you. Meligirl5 (talk) 18:33, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello @MicrobiologyMarcus, I had to keep on reading your comment all over again on the article as it seems so confusing to me because I’m just getting to know about the inline citation as a beginner. I have just take a look at the WP:INCITE and the WP:FOOTNOTES but I still need more further explanation using a sample from the article so I could clearly understand. Of course this is a draft page. So is it possible you explain to me using the article or you make a change on the article due to your comment (correction) and I take over from there. I look forward to your reply and hope you understand what I’m trying to say because I’m trying to understand as well. Thanks & hope you have a lovely day. Meligirl5 (talk) 23:53, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I can see I nominated this article for AFD two years ago because it doesn't meet the WP:GNG. But from a whole lot from what I can see from the sources. Subject has now gained a lot of WP:WHATSIGCOV and WP:GNG from the references section since 2022.
