Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bunny Luv

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 delete. Swarm ♠ 23:22, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bunny Luv

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

Nominations don't count as the award win is not a significant award and the category was only awarded twice anyway. Therefore fails gng and pornbio Spartaz ^Humbug! 23:00, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:01, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:01, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not come close to passing the notability guidelines for pornographic actors.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:34, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Nothing to suggest better notability here as mentioned. SwisterTwister talk 03:15, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. NightMoves awards are marginally notable at best, and fall well below the "well-known/significant" standard of PORNBIO. During the extensive discussions leading up to the most recent revisions of that guideline, there was no support for treating them as meeting the standard. Moreover, this is a "Fan Award", meaning it is based on an easily manipulated website poll run by an unimportant local magazine. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 18:08, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This is actually the first year that we've apparently ever had an actual Wikipedia article about the NightMoves Awards, so I don't know that we've had any recent AfDs that have actually determined that they are not "a well-known industry award" ceremony. The specific award category in question here does not appear to have been a long-term award category though, and the subject here apparently won the "Fan's Choice" version of it (not the "Editor's Choice" version of it), which may mean that it might have been a less "significant industry award" category. Given the number of blue-links in the NightMoves Award Wikipedia article, the award ceremony does appear to have, so far, been a virtual who's who of the adult film industry, and many other of the NightMoves Award categories have similiar or exactly the same names as other adult film industry award ceremonies. Guy1890 (talk) 01:39, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:PORNBIO. The NightMoves Award is indeed notable. It passes WP:GNG with significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, both mainstream (WTSP & Tampa Bay Times) and adult (AVN & XBIZ). The specific category (Best New Director) is a newcomer award. There is overwhelming consensus favoring the inclusion of newcomer awards in PORNBIO in this discussion with no one arguing that it shouldn't also apply to directors and/or only apply to performers. PORNBIO states "The following criteria should be brought up in a Wikipedia:Articles for deletion discussion only in relation to subjects who are or have been involved in the pornography industry", meaning this guideline isn't just about porn performers, it applies to EVERYONE in porn, including directors. Also, the NightMoves Fan's Choice awards aren't an "easily manipulated website poll" as stated above. Here is the 2005 (year in which Bunny Luv AKA Celeste won) online voting ballot. Phone number and address were required fields that year in order to vote, making it extremely difficult to cheat. Rebecca1990 (talk) 04:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- - "Extremely difficult to cheat"? Not hardly. My local alternative newspaper tried that a few years ago, and discovered that, for example, the "Best Bail Bondsman" category got lots of entries in the same handwriting from somebody who just spent a few hours while waiting for the phone to ring filling out ballots using names and addresses from his files, and when those ran out he used the phone book. He was caught only because he dropped them off in one big batch, so the handwriting match was obvious. (Why a "Best Bail Bondsman" category? Back when print advertising was dominant, they had a lot of bondsmen advertising, and most of these magazine "awards" are meant to keep advertisers happy. There's no actual verification going on. Do you really think they really called the phone number to check that the ballot was legit? More likely, they sold the phone numbers and addresses to direct mail and telephone solicitors. Lots of magazines do that. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 22:09, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - That story about your local newspaper is completely irrelevant. You're attempting to discredit the NightMoves Fan's Choice Awards with an unrelated story instead of giving an example actually involving NightMoves. In an effort to discredit other porn awards in the past, you have thoroughly researched them and shared any info you found at AfD (e.g. Urban X Award & UK Adult Film and Television Award). That fact that you couldn't find a specific example for NightMoves indicates that there is none and that you are just speculating. "For awards with multiple rounds of nominations such as the Fans of Adult Media and Entertainment Award, only final round nominations are considered" used to be part of PORNBIO#1. The FAME award finalists, just like the winners, were fan voted. The only reason why this was removed from PORNBIO is that all porn award nominations, not just FAME, were excluded from consideration. FAME and other fan voted awards, as long as they are wins, have not been excluded from PORNBIO consideration. If it's a fan award, you think the recipient cheated, if it's an editor award, you think the recipient paid to win. Is there ANY porn award you consider legitimate? Rebecca1990 (talk) 07:35, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Passing the GNG is not the same as being a well known/significant award and in fact there have been a number of recent discussions where minor awards have been rejected in the discussion. This is not a significant award otherwise it would have been issued for more than 2 years. That rather suggests that it is of passing interest. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:37, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Unfortunately looks don't count towards notability ...., Anyway she fails PORNBIO & GNG so delete./ –Davey2010^Talk 00:58, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In 2002, the St. Petersburg Times (reliable source/independent of the subject) stated that the NightMoves Awards were "the third largest in the porn industry". Other porn industry award ceremonies held in 2002 include AVN, XRCO, Venus, and NINFA, which are all considered well-known/significant industry awards by consensus, satisfying PORNBIO ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5] & [6]). The St. Petersburg Times article doesn't mention what the two largest were, though I assume they were AVN and XRCO. Regardless, we've got these 4 well-known/significant industry awards and NightMoves is bigger than at least two of them. If you want to debate the specific award category, that's fine, but the ceremony is definitely well-known/significant. Rebecca1990 (talk) 07:35, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails GNG. Carrite (talk) 20:08, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[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.