Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin Bradley


 * 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 of the debate was no consensus. Mailer Diablo 03:29, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Benjamin_Bradley (porn star)
Delete. It is a simple vanity page, non-famous person Ciperl 07:22, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * While I feel that noting WP:NOT censored for the protection of minors is appropriate right now, this is an insignificant, non-notable porn actor, and as such I say Delete -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 07:54, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete in accordance with WP:VANITY. haz (user talk) 08:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity. --Ter e nce Ong (恭喜发财) 13:32, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't it be better to check a porn database, instead of his IMDB entry before deciding on his notability> - Mgm|(talk) 14:07, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Participating in the commercial sex trade is not notable per se. Monicasdude 15:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - not notable enough. Latinus 20:07, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - there is no evidence that this was created by the subject (i.e., vanity). It is not adulatory. There are lots of articles about porn stars, and B Bradley is more notable thatn many of them. He has appeared in at least four porn films produced by major porn studios (Falcon is the biggest studio in gay porn). This article has a photo of the subject, and is properly categorized and linked to other articles. Zeromacnoo 03:48, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - agree with Zeromacnoo. Jonathunder 04:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete nn. We routinely delete female porn stars who have appeared in many more movies on well known labels. --kingboyk 04:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * But why? Isn't the aim of Wikipedia to expand? Are those creating content able to keep ahead of those deleting content? Of course, the best way to scare off contributors is to delete thier work. Zeromacnoo 04:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I shall Abstain. I don't know anything about gay porn and was basing my reasoning on appearances in 4 films, in an industry which churns out films on a daily basis. Others say he is famous in his sector so I shall defer to them. --kingboyk 19:49, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - I don't think this qualifies as vanity. -- ProveIt (talk) 04:14, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep -- If this one goes there are hundreds of actors, Star Trek characters, etc... that should go with it for the same reason. It appears not to be vanity, and he is as notable as the multitudes of semi-notables that make it into Wikipedia.  The problem with setting a high bar for notability is that this remove people who later become famous, remove information that a few users might be looking for, etc...  The only problem with setting the bar low is that the article takes up a few electrons on a hard drive. -- Samuel Wantman 07:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * keep please this actor is famous enough more than most star trek things Yuckfoo 08:07, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * keep I fully agree with Zeromacnoo here; Benjamin Bradley is by far famous enough to allow for a dedicated article. Spheroide 19:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Ardenn 20:12, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable enough as per WP:BIO for living people. Hall Monitor 21:16, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, I really think it should be replaced with the much more famous Benjamin Bradley (http://www.harcourtschool.com/activity/biographies_science/bradley/) A black slave who in the 1850s invented the steam engines for warships. He used the money he made from selling the patent of the engine to buy his freedom.  But then again, I'm new to the Wikipedia community and don't know all the protocols yet. Ciperl 23:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Deleting an article to replace it with one of the same name is not a Wikipedia protocol. The Wikipedia protocal is to give one article (the one for the less famous person) a disambiguated name, e.g. "Benjamin Bradley (porn star)" or "Benjamin Bradley (inventor)", and put a note at the top of the main article directed readers to the disambiguated article. Alternatively, both articles can have diambiguated titles, and the main "Benjamin Bradley" article would consist only of links to the other two articles with a little text to help the reader find the right article. Ground Zero | t 00:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, it would make more sense to move this page to "Benjamin Bradley (porn star)", as soon as the inventor pages is ready. -- ProveIt (talk) 02:05, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, I will work on the Benjamin Bradley, inventor of steam engines for ships, article and then maybe someone can help me learn how to put it up and create the disambiguated titles. Ciperl 17:21, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think that we can move the current article while there is a vote for deletion underway. It will probably have to wait until the vote is complete. If the article survives, it can be moved. In the meantime, Ciperl can start his/her article by clicking here: Benjamin Bradley (inventor). Don't forget to add the article to a category or two, e.g., Category:Inventors and Category:Slaves by placing and  at the bottom of the article. Zeromacnoo 17:28, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure you can move it. Just make sure you update the AFD tag so that the link to the deletion discussion still points here. --kingboyk 04:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. Zeromacnoo 13:25, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, inappropriate criteria cited for nomination, famous =! notable, and article meets WP:BIO. A drian L amo ··  04:17, 5 February 2006 (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.