Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helen Duval

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. I have considered the keep argument that the Venus Award in the category "Country Benelux" should be sufficient for notability. However, there is also merit to the delete side who point out that this is an obscure, short-lived category of considerably less prestige. For a biography, the sourcing also needs to be considered and in this case it is limited to coverage in online databases such as IMDB, something that by itself does not constitute reliable sourcing sufficient for a biography on a living person. Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:17, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Helen Duval

Helen Duval (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)

Fails pornbio and gng Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:17, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:49, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as obviously Fails PORNBIO & GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 01:21, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Davey2010, care to reconsider? Duval won an award that wasn't mentioned in her article at the time of your vote. What's your take on it? Rebecca1990 (talk) 03:23, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry but nope, I could be wrong but I don't believe the Country award is a notable or even relevent award, –Davey2010^Talk 07:43, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep Passes WP:PORNBIO. Duval is the recipient of a Venus Award that is not a scene-related/ensemble category. (Country Award: Benelux). Rebecca1990 (talk) 05:23, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No sign the subject satisfies the GNG. PORNBIO claim rests entirely on a single award, which must pass the "well-known/significant" test of PORNBIO. Rebecca's argument that all award categories that are not scene/ensemble-related meet the standard is not supported by the text of PORNBIO or by the extensive discussions leading up to the current revision of PORNBIO, and it has been rejected in prior AFDs and at DRV. (See, for example, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deauxma (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 December 26 (Jayden James).) While the Venus Awards may generally be notable, not all its award categories meet the well-known/significant test; this trade show changes its award categories extensively from year to year (apparently to "honor" its major financial backers and whichever "guests" show up. Before we can say an award is significant we ought to be able, at the very least, tell what it is for, and these Venus "Country Awards", which were given out only in two years out of the roughly twently the awards have existed, have gone to performers, producers, to "The Girls of Private", and to something from Scandanavia called "Max's". (And neither Scandanavia nor Benelux is a "country", underlining the arbitrary and inchoate nature of theae categories.) There's no evidence that anyone not involved in the awards ceremonies treats these particular awards as significant -- no GBooks or GNews hits, no documentation beyond the awards announcements (which puts the lie to the claim that they meet the "well-known" standard as well. Trade shows often give faux-awards to guests for just showing up, and such mock-honors don't do anything to establish notability. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 16:34, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Duval is the recipient of a Venus Award !!!!!!--Hillary Scott`love (talk) 10:23, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • A regional award that was only issues for two years. Not all awards are equal or meet the standard although I do understand you are coming from the point of view that you want to keep every porn article under even the most flimsy pretext. Spartaz <sup>Humbug!</sup> 10:41, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Spartaz, you want to delete all articles about porn actress ... I also watch what footballers, actors, models and other celebrities without significance within the Wikipedia. However porn actress won awards be deleted from the site.--Hillary Scott`love (talk) 11:16, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • And do you routinely vote to keep football players even if they don;t meet NFOOTY - which is actually far more stringent than PORNBIO. I shall ignore your pathetic character assassination over my intentions except to comment that my views are more supported at AFD then your ones. Maybe you are the one with an agenda? Mine is just to enforce our inclusion standard because WikiProject PORN wants to keep every porn article is can. If you guys managed your own house properly you wouldn't need me to come in and enforce the communities consensus on where the inclusion standard for porn performers and I wouldn't waste my time doing your work for you. Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:40, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Whether you all like it or not, scene-related and ensemble categories are the only awards excluded from PORNBIO. Your attempts at trying to interpret it in a less inclusive way do not change the wording of the guideline, which is "Has won a well-known and significant industry award. Awards in scene-related and ensemble categories are excluded from consideration." And the above attempt to degrade the value of the award can actually be used as further proof of Duval's notability. It was pointed out above that despite being titled "Country Awards", several of the Country Award subcategories were given out to entire regions instead of specific countries, such as Benelux and Scandinavia. I bet that if instead of two country awards for Benelux and Scandinavia, Venus gave out six country awards for Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, you would still complain about how Venus gives out "too many" awards. It was also pointed out above that the country awards are given out to anything porn related, whether it's performers, directors, films, or studios, they were placed together in one category. This is further proof of Duval's notability. Tell me, what is more impressive, winning a "Best Actress (Netherlands)" award, in which Duval's only competition would have been other Dutch female porn stars, or winning a "Country Award: Benelux", in which she not only competed against other female porn stars, but also male porn stars, directors, films, studios, etc. from not only The Netherlands, but the entire Benelux region? Also, the above claim that porn award ceremonies change their categories because it's recipients pay to win awards they qualify for, is totally false. Porn awards change their categories to reflect changes in trends. For example, AVN had a "Best Interactive DVD" category between 2000 and 2011 because interactive porn was popular during the 2000's, but since it no longer is, AVN removed that category. In 2013, AVN added a "Best Star Showcase" category because porn films that focus entirely on one female porn star, are popular right now. The day these films stop being popular, the industry will stop producing them because they no longer sell, and AVN will remove this category. No porn producer approaches these award shows and says "Hey, I made a porno in the [insert genre here] genre, which you don't have a category for. Could you add a category for Best [insert genre here] Film at the next awards show so I can win? Here's some money!" That's not how it works. Porn award categories change based on trends, not requests by it's recipients. Perhaps Venus stopped giving out those country awards because the local porn industry in those regions went into decline or something, I don't know, but your claim that Duval and other Venus recipients paid to win their awards is unfounded. Rebecca1990 (talk) 23:32, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Whether you and whoever's paying you to edit Wikipedia like it or not, your interpretation of WP:PORNBIO has been rejected by consensus, over and over. It's conspicuous that you make no effort to square your claim with the outcomes and deletion discussions I cited, where the community rejected your argument. You pretty much avoided the lengthy and detailed discussions at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people), which pretty clearly put the lie to your argument. The way that you deny the established consensus on this point, and cast aspersions and make personal attacks on editors taking contrary positions, is a pretty clear demonstration of bad faith -- the same "appalling" bad faith you were cited for a previous discussion, by several experienced admins. You've never made any effort to raise this issue on the appropriate guideline page, another pattern of, at best, suboptimal behaviour. It's clear that your goal is not to edit collaboratively or reach consensus, but to poison the editing/discussion environment to advance your own interests. That will not end well for you, even if the road to the end proves long and bumpy. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 15:45, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm the one casting aspersions and making personal attacks? You're the one accusing me of being a paid publicist for a porn star that retired 13 years ago. And the deletion discussions you cited aren't prove of anything. One of them is a DRV, the other took place after a DRV discussion for that same article that resulted in consensus to refer it to AfD, attracting several DRV participants. DRV participants are notorious for their anti-porn bias on here. And even if those discussions were unbiased and could be taken seriously, they are completely irrelevant in this discussion because the Venus Country Awards weren't mentioned in those discussions. Rebecca1990 (talk) 03:04, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, "Rebecca", you've made career at AFD and in related discussions accusing editors you disagree with of dishonesty, racism, and prejudice, and your behavior was described as "appalling" bad faith by univolved administrators. Multiple experienced users have characterized you as a paid editor. You're undeniably an SPA with an agenda. You've repeatedly posted false claims that press releases are independent reliable sources. The fact that you've reached the point of smearing DRV contributors generally is just the latest example of your utter lack of good faith and refusal to accept broad and established consensus -- as is you repeated misrepresentation of the consensus interpretation of PORNBIO. Your !vote here should be disregarded. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 17:10, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • I am just a porn viewer/fan with a lot of knowledge on the adult industry who decided to use that knowledge to edit porn-related articles on Wikipedia, that's it. I am not a publicist. The burden of proof isn't even on me to prove I'm not a publicist, since I shouldn't have to prove a negative, but I'll try. I actually discourage the use of Wikipedia for promotion (see my edits/edit summaries at Miles Long, which looked like this (an obvious advertisement for the article's subject) before I got to it). And it's YOUR vote that should be disregarded. You lost all credibility at determining what a notable award is when you voted to delete the article of a recipient of one of the top two most prestigious awards in the entire adult film industry. Rebecca1990 (talk) 19:35, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • • More bad faith and distortion, "Rebecca". About the only thing you're not going to do to defend your untenable position is to actually provide reliably sourced evidence that the claimed awards actually meet the "well-known/significant" test under the consensus hammered out in the extensive discussions of revisions to PORNBIO. You can babble on with your incessant Wolfowitz=bad, Spartaz-bad, DRV-editors-prejudiced claptrap, but those aren't relevant arguments. Misrepresenting my comments and votes in other deletion discussions only puts you in an even worse light; what I actually said in the discussion you miscite was "Delete and redirect to AVN Best New Starlet Award. The article contains no significant, reliably sourced biographical content and no claim to notability beyond the award. In this situation, broad community consensus (not limited to porn) has been that redirects to list articles can be appropriate, and I believe that should be the standard treatment for BLPs in sensitive subject areas." Not too long ago several editors took that position in a deletion discussion regarding a novel by a Nobel-winning author, which is a much, much, much much more significant award than anything given out in porn. You regularly denigrate editors who strike a different balance betweeb the GNG and SNGs than you prefer, and that's hardly a sign of good faith on you part. You regularly deny that the important language in WP:PEOPLE that "meeting one or more [SNG criteria] does not guarantee that a subject should be included", even though it is no less a part of the governing notability guideline than PORNBIO language is. As for credibility, I'll just note that your accuracy rate in AFD !voting is about 34%, while mine is up over 80%, and my rate for AFD nominations I've made is up around 90%. No reasonable editpr would say in good faith what you say. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 23:41, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • And don't think that being a porn fan is automatically a WP:Conflict of interest. Although I'm a fan of porn in general, I'm actually not a fan of the vast majority of porn performers whose articles I have edited/created (I think about 90% of them are overrated and unattractive, I just don't let my personal opinion influence how I edit articles). Rebecca1990 (talk) 20:11, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
            • The guilty flee when no man pursueth. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 23:41, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - The Venus Awards are some of the most "well-known industry award" ceremonies in Europe. However, I honestly don't know how to categorize the "Country Awards" that were apparently only given out at these award ceremonies in 2000-2001. They might be some kind of lifetime achievement-type awards for specific portions of Europe, but that's not clear at all to me at this point. I can't say for sure whether the specific award category "Country Award: Benelux" is a "significant" or major award category at this time. As an aside, I've yet to see any evidence that the Venus Awards have tried to "'honor' its major financial backers" or give random awards out to "whichever 'guests' show up" to its award ceremonies. Guy1890 (talk) 07:46, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - meets of PORNBIO - won of award. Subtropical-man talk
  (en-2) 21:41, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, appears to pass PORNBIO per Venus Award win. Cavarrone 17:18, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete As with almost all awards in all fields, except for the most famous awards, for those awards that have multiple categories, being a winner in any one category is not sufficient as the sole or principal element of `notability. DGG ( talk ) 01:51, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete at best as I notice why others believe this could be kept but all I simply see is that Award and there could certainly be a better article than simply that one Award. SwisterTwister talk 02:08, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete clearly fails PORNBIO, as demonstrated by precedent above. Also there's the SPA issue. AddMore der Zweite (talk) 07:28, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Incubate This article should be drafted in this case as she really has won a major award. Vincent60030 (talk) 07:17, 11 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.