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 keep. (non-admin closure) Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:36, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lupe Fuentes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Filing this along on procedurally, see the requests at Talk:Lupe_Fuentes#Courtesy_deletion and User_talk:Lupe_Fuentes_official. In short, contributor claiming to be the subject requests deletion. j⚛e decker^talk 04:33, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:48, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:48, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:48, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Well known, notable individual. --Auric talk 12:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep She's notable enough for our inclusion standards. Considering that she's making music now (or seems to have been in the last year) then she is still trying to be notable for something, i.e. not dropping from the lime light. I guess I'm not really clear on what her objection is. All the information is sourced. Is she looking to re-write history? Dismas|^(talk) 13:30, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Probably. See this and this edit by her boyfriend. Nymf (talk) 15:49, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There was additional, negative, and badly sourced material somewhat tangentially related to the subject in the article at the time of the request which was the likely reason for the request. --j⚛e decker^talk 16:11, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Not convinced that was the reason. If you look at the edit summary of this edit by her boyfriend, he's implying that she has never been a pornstar. Nymf (talk) 16:44, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Oh yeah! I had forgotten about those edits. Thank you, both. My opinion is still Keep. Dismas|^(talk) 17:09, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Note the first time he's attempted to own this article. [1] Morbidthoughts (talk) 04:25, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per arguments above. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 14:32, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per everyone above - Notable DJ . –Davey2010 • (talk) 22:59, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This is an article about a notable person and should be kept. As noted by Joe Decker at the BLP notice board, there are BLP issues that should be addressed immediately and repaired by a more knowledgable editor than myself. – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 02:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Baby. Bathwater. Subject should be more specific about the negative material in her article and we should consider whether it is appropriate to remove it under our BLP policies. Morbidthoughts (talk) 04:55, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not notable enough when she was in porn and not notable as a musician. Let her move on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.10.179.112 (talk) 14:10, 13 August 2014 (UTC) — 86.10.179.112 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [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.