Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Van Darkholme (2nd nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. bibliomaniac15 02:20, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Van Darkholme

[edit]
AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Van Darkholme (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)

the subject notability is exclusively based on the fact he is Vietnamese-American. he didn't win any important prize in porn and didn't have much coverage either. the sources include are 2 of his personal pages, IMDb, IAFD, a porn web site with his movie and blogs apart from from those sources we can only find a couple of interview and a book he wrote. AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 13:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 14:54, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 14:54, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 14:54, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 14:55, 24 April 2020 (UTC) [reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 14:57, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 14:57, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 14:58, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 15:04, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 15:04, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

yes but he's a very known internet meme, search gachimuchi. If he can't have his own wikipedia arcticle, then so can't András Arató, for example. (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.83.245.112 (talk • contribs)

I don't have a problem with rough talking but I don't think it is well taken by wikipedia community. If he is so well known there must be something out there to prove it. Something like articles or books. this is how I feel: while we can be a little more flexible than usual with porn actor because sourcing is hard to find, being a porn actor can't become a free pass for whoever to be here on wikipedia. there are plenty of porn stars on wikipedia with full coverage across their whole life. If you feel the page can be improved you are well come to do it and feed us with more information... may be in a slightly more refined way than the one you just used.--AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 17:20, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Notability can't be just taken for grant or stated by an user, it has to be proven. If you have any reliable web site please feel free to enrich this bio. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 08:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.kink DOT com/director/54/Van-Darkholme [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.193.245.193 (talk) 17:55, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Let me explain you. the first website mention as you obviously know is on a black list so not reliable. the first of the five links you give: his name appears only one time in a reported conversation, he is definitely not the subject of the article. second link: could be a good reference as long as the web site is reliable. third link: not the subject of the article but passes mention. fourth link: IMDb which is considered unreliable. fifth link: it's his own web site. so out of 6 sources you presented only one and half can be used to prove notability, and honestly I don't this this is still enough. but you can start putting them in his bio and see if they sum up to something.--AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 20:38, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
He's a gay porn actor, he used to suck cocks and pump semen into his co-presenters rectal cavities. It's not something you put in a newspaper. Still, that does not mean he's not a notable person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.193.245.193 (talk) 17:15, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
well, many porn actor ended up on news papers for different reasons. plus, it would be acceptable also if he was constantly on web sites like AVN or Xbiz which publish only porn related stuff.--AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 20:07, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also 101 Rent Boys documentary about gay porno. Van Darkholme's notorious part in this documentary explaining how he decided to go full♂master♂♂♂ and changed his entire house into a hardcore BDSM dungeon♂♂♂♂♂♂♂ where fisting is $300♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂♂ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.193.245.193 (talk) 07:43, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A bit more about the doCUMentary — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.193.245.193 (talk) 07:45, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
you mention a few sources but one article on Xbiz and AVN doesn't prove much of notability. for the other sources you give one is only a mere mention, another one doesn't even mention him and the last one is a youtube video which is not good to sustain notability. this page was already nominated on 2007 and probably survived because "may be we can find better sources", well 14 years have passed and we are in the same situation noting showing notability. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 09:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sulfurboy (talk) 16:49, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the sources identified by Cardiffbear88. Alejandro said earlier that "it would be acceptable also if he was constantly on web sites like AVN or Xbiz". Cardiffbear88 found sources on AVN and Xbiz. Now Alejandro says that those sources don't prove notability. This is moving the goalposts based on whatever is offered at the moment. Alejandro has now posted five times since his original nomination, responding to every Keep vote or comment. This is WP:BLUDGEON behavior. I would suggest that he reads that essay, steps back, and allows other people to look at the arguments and sources, and make their own judgment. — Toughpigs (talk) 19:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The AVN and XBiz articles are obvious press releases. The porn project's guidance on sources expressly mentions that AVN does not indicate that an article is a press release. The articles are based on what the subjects say, not the news organization, and they follow the standard press release format. Failing the independent secondary source test, they are not proof of notability. • Gene93k (talk) 21:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The copy for both AVN and Xbiz sources are completely different, leadImg me to believe that one or both have been substantially edited from any press release, giving it editorial independence. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 21:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't change my mind, if he was CONSTANTLY on those web sites, how do you translate having 2 articles on 2 web sites to being constantly on those webs sites?. yes You are right, I answered to too many keep vote and I apologize so I will not do that again but I am still answering when my name is made. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 08:21, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per those above. Adequate sourcing has been demonstrated. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd suggest someone checking AlejandroLeloirRey's edit history. Large amount of deletion nominations suggests that this account was made only for vandalism. User_talk:AlejandroLeloirRey#Too_many_deletions Special:Contributions/AlejandroLeloirRey — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.193.245.193 (talk) 14:29, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is this a personal attack? WP:PA go ahead and check my history and you shall see I spent a big amount of time on gay porn actors bios (I wrote one myself). When I felt there was nothing more I could do to improve those bios I decided it was time to get rid of the non notable ones. Most of these bios were accepted basing on old guidelines and they simply do not meet anymore the wikipetia criteria. I nominated 11 bios, of which 1 have survived, 4 have been deleted and 6 are still into the process, it looks like I didn't nominate random bios to me. In a few days there are other bios I would like to bring to the attention of the community, I don't do it right now because I was asked to slow down. so if there is something wrong with my intention please just let me know. by the way, why don't we ask everybody here to clean up their language? I can see some posts that are totally inappropriate. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 08:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete Of the sources now cited in the article, BN seems the only one to help establish notability, and that is not much more than a passing mention, rather minimal. Of those brought out in this AfD, interviews are generally not independent, and Gene93k's point about the AVN and Xbiz sources seems to reduce their value. Notability is always a judgement call, and I think this case is close but not over the line. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:09, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I think GNG has been met, it’s unsurprising that an extreme gay sex master(?) or whatever the terminology isn’t highly populating mainstream sources. However he is found throughout more kink-laden ones, and a good article is possible. Gleeanon409 (talk) 08:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Less accusations and more detail on the claimed sources would be best
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 07:56, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Kotaku is an acceptable source for video game news. I encourage Alejandro once again to step back and allow other folks to judge. — Toughpigs (talk) 16:49, 9 May 2020 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Van_Darkholme_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=957287244"