Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brandon Iron


 * 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)  Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  08:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Brandon Iron

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is about a porn director and performer in a very extreme section of the industry ( the article has been cleaned up to remove the details). Lack of coverage in reliable sources so WP:BASIC is failed. The awards are minor or group sex so don't count for Porn Bio. Also, please note that the subject himself wants this article to be deleted- see. Atlantic306 (talk) 21:56, 7 June 2016 (UTC) Atlantic306 (talk) 21:56, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Atlantic306 (talk) 22:03, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:24, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:26, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alberta-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:26, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:26, 8 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment. The XRCO Unsung Swordsman wins meet the letter of WP:PORNBIO, but niche categories have been disputed many times. • Gene93k (talk) 09:29, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:PORNBIO#1 with XRCO Unsung Swordsman wins, which are well-known/significant industry awards that aren't scene-related/ensemble categories. This specific award has also been described as prestigious by a mainstream media outlet. There's an AfD for a similar award resulting in keep too. Rebecca1990 (talk) 15:22, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep The Unsung Swordsman is a long-running body of work award, not a scene related one so it meets PORNBIO. Wikiuser20102011 (talk) 01:45, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think that there's any point in expressing an "delete" opinion, because the WP:PORNBIO guideline is so absurdly inadequate as to be impossible to argue against. In other fields the secondary notability guidelines act as indicators that significant coverage probably exists in independent reliable sources even if it can't be found easily in the timeframe of a deletion discussion. There is no evidence that awards such as this "XRCO Unsung Swordsman" lead to any such coverage of the recipients. Indepenendent reliable sources are very rare in this field, so our articles in this field should also be very rare. Most of the silliness that prevailed in Wikipedia's early years has been eliminated by the more mature people who started editing later, but this field seems to be one of the last such vestiges remaining. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:29, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The rationale behind the "silliness" is that some porn stars may be of general interest even though the mainstream media tend to shun pornography. Recognition by peers and established critics in a particular field can indicate notability. • Gene93k (talk) 19:17, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * That might be the claimed rationale, but I don't buy it. We shouldn't host articles about living people that don't have reliable sources that have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, which none of the sources here, including the web site of the organisation conferring this award, do. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:42, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - NOTE: I've recently edited the article under consideration here. The subject here has "won a well-known and significant industry award", namely the XRCO Award for "Unsung Swordsman" twice. I don't think that a request from 2009 (that wasn't honored then for whatever reason) should be honored now.
 * The PORNBIO inclusion standards are still designed, at this late date, very similarly to the ANYBIO standard, and the idea that an awarding organization isn't a reliable source for who won its own awards is an argument that has been dismissed many times in many different forums at this late date. Guy1890 (talk) 00:32, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * In this case, and many others, the WP:PORNBIO guideline directly contradicts the WP:BLP policy. The latter should prevail. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:49, 13 June 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.