- 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) Ya sh ! 20:57, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Glamour Solos
- Glamour Solos ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails NFILM and the GNG, and violates WP:NOTDIR. "Best Solo Release" (aka something like "Outstanding Achievement in Masturbation") falls well below the NFILM standard of "a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking". No independent sourcing, reliable or otherwise. Just a WP:INDISCRIMINATE collection of castlists. The article just bristles with unacceptable content -- original research inaccurately conflating three different video series with similar titles into a single line, cut-and-pasted promotional copy, wretched sourcing. It also achieves new depths of porn related stupidity: among its listed notable female performers are male professional poker player Kenna James and former major league baseball player Randy Moore, who is apparently masturbating posthumously. There's no reason to salvage anything from this mess. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. ( talk) 20:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Delete- As per Hullaballoo. A web search shows nothing but where to watch it - porn and streaming sites. The series is on IMDb, but what isn't - also the IMDb entries are nothing but cast lists, no ratings, no reviews. Would struggle to find what criteria it meets at WP:NFILM. References are shaky at best - mostly links to the award nominations at AVN. Also pretty promotional, but this is by the by. If anyone from WP:XXX can offer a different perspective,I just don't see how this is notable or valuable to the encyclopediaOlly say hi 22:22, 15 February 2016 (UTC)- Keep - changed from delete as per clarifying comments from Erpert and Rebecca1990 - I think i underestimated the notability of AVNs. Thanks for the insights, I suppose porn has a different context to mainstream filmography that must be considered. The rest of my comment still stands re promotional, but the awards make the article notable, thanks guys Olly say hi 09:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - Adding a recommendation to keep and improve the article with regards to tone and references Olly say hi 09:05, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. I think "Best Solo Release" is getting confused with "Best Solo Sex Scene"; although the latter has been determined to not pass notability by itself, I have yet to find a consensus stating that the former doesn't. And the argument that there is no independent sourcing is inaccurate; the only way it would apply is if all the sources came from girlfriendsfilms.net—and frankly, this is a common mistake that comes up in porn-related deletion discussions: as I hinted at here, the subject of the article is Glamour Solos, not pornography (pornography is the category). There are plenty of independent sources from AVN, XBIZ, etc. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 09:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:09, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:10, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:10, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Keep - many awards, notable.
Subtropical-man
talk
(en-2) 15:17, 16 February 2016 (UTC) - Keep Passes WP:NFILM with 5 AVN Awards for Best Solo Release/Movie ( [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]). Rebecca1990 ( talk) 18:46, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Comment. Please identify any discussion supporting your claim. Neither WP:NFILM nor any pertinent discussion on its talk page supports your claim that all AVN Awards inherently meet the NFILM standard of a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking, or that an AVN Award in a narrow, down-level category like "Best Solo Release" (ie, masturbation video) is legitimately considered a major award. The complete absence of independent coverage of that award so plainly belies the argument. Since NFILM is careful to state that its award criterion is merely a "rule of thumb", a less reliable indicator than found in other SNGs, and that independent third-party sourcing is required, the lack of such sourcing compels deletion. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. ( talk) 14:11, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Allow me to disagree with you that AVN award is not a notable award. AVN award is a major award for excellence in pornographic industry. It was first awarded in 1984, over 30 years ago. Today, it's a major award specific to pornographic/erotic film and video as demonstrated by multiple independent reliable sources including this book published by Harvard University Press. Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 14:54, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Keep .... We all know why I'm !voting Keep and it's not because of policies. – Davey2010 Talk 03:34, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Just to clarify - My !vote is a "HOTTIE" one... – Davey2010 Talk 22:43, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: 5 AVN Awards are enough to meet WP:NFILM. Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 14:08, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- 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.