Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Deauxma (2nd nomination) - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Candleabracadabra (talk | contribs) at 13:13, 20 September 2013. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 13:13, 20 September 2013 by Candleabracadabra (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Deauxma

AfDs for this article:
Deauxma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A pornographic actress whose notability is contested. At Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2013 September 10, a request to recreate this article, originally deleted in 2006 and protected since 2007, turned into a full-fledged sourcing / notability debate but did not result in a consensus. Because content decisions are to be made via AfD, I'm exercising my DRV closer's discretion to refer the article (in the form of the draft proposed for recreation) to AfD for a decision about the sourcing / notability issue. This being a procedural nomination, I myself express no opinion about that issue.  Sandstein  12:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Delete. Fails PORNBIO, without multiple nominations for well-known/significant awards. Fails the GNG, because there are no reliable sources for biographical content -- all the references, beyond databases and laundry lists, are either promotional pages or press releases. Fails BLP requirements, as an article concerning a living person without reliable sources. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 12:35, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:18, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:19, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:19, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Keep. Deauxma passes WP:PORNBIO because she has been nominated for three "well-known and significant industry awards" by AVN and XBIZ and none of them are for "scene-related and ensemble categories". Rebecca1990 (talk) 17:57, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Keep per nominations. I can find no consensus that "MILF/Cougar Performer of the Year" is not a significant industry award category, so even without the other references (which are reliable), she still passes WP:PORNBIO. Erpert 18:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Delete, per what was said in the DRV. Industry-internal awards – and much more so mere nominations for them – are "significant" only if and insofar their significance is reflected in coverage by other, reliable, independent (i.e. non-industry-internal) sources. Show me the coverage of the "MILF/Cougar..." nomination process in independent media; then and only then can we talk about notability. (Ceterum censeo WP:PORNBIO has lacked consensus for years and has for that reason long ceased to be a valid guideline.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:45, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
    • "WP:PORNBIO has lacked consensus for years and has for that reason long ceased to be a valid guideline." That still isn't true, no matter how badly you may want it to be (and I'm not going to elaborate on that because it has already been explained to you several times). And you want the "keep" !voters to show you the coverage of a nomination process? Not only is that impossible (unless we actually work for AVN or XBIZ, that is), but I don't recall WP:ANYBIO requiring any such thing. Erpert 08:28, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Analysis of the currently-cited sources:
    1. Internet Adult Film Database: not a reliable source. WP:BIO#Notes #6 summarizes the many previous discussions on this better than I can.
    2. Southern Charms Happenings, 3. Orgasm News, 4. Barelist: all interviews with minimal analysis. Primary.
    5. AVN, 6. AVN, 8. XBIZ, 9. AVN, 10. XBIZ: A mix of press releases and minimally-edited reprints of press releases (they didn't even fix the typos!). Not independent.
    7. 2013 XBIZ award nominations. Ten nominations for her category; 311 total nominations in performer categories by my count.
    11. Deauxmalive.com: Article subject's website. Not independent.
    12. 2011 AVN award nominations via archive.org. Fifteen nominations for her category; 305 total nominations in performer categories by my count.
    13. 2013 AVN award nominations via archive.org. Fifteen nominations for her category; 208 total nominations in performer categories by my count.
    So the sum total of our independent, reliable, secondary sources is "2013 NOMINEES... Best Actress - All-Girl Release... Deauxma, Road Queen 22 (Girlfriends Films)"; "2011 Nominations for the 2011 AVN Awards... MILF/Cougar Performer of the Year... Deauxme"; and "2013 NOMINATIONS... MILF/COUGAR PERFORMER OF THE YEAR... DEAUXMA". Even if one accepts WP:PORNBIO at face value and argues that these three nominations amidst 824! others are for "well-known and significant award" despite their total absence of secondary coverage, there's simply not enough material here to write a neutral and verifiable biography. Delete. 74.74.150.139 (talk) 10:27, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Delete per lack of substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. Being in porn and having a twin sister just isn't enough. Candleabracadabra (talk) 13:13, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Categories: