` :Yes, your logic is clear. GNG however is easily interpreted in a range of ways, take ``Significant coverage`` this depends on context and if I were a deletionist I would push this point to claim almost any porn-related source were either insignificant or unreliable. For example the Adam Gay Video Directory has previously been challenged as a source even though it is the most definitive publication in the field and cited by multiple academic books and articles. :It seems a great pity that so much effort is being used to force a hard and probably poor interpretation of BLP (via PORNBIO) to delete articles about early erotic actors rather than finding ways of presenting such information in an encyclopedic fashion. I cannot interpret recent actions other than a prejudicial distaste for the subject of pornography driving hard-line interpretation of the guidance. Unfortunately it does appear that there are a large number of admins without experience of building consensus rather than assuming that they embody it.  `