Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Girls Kissing Girls


 * 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. –MuZemike 23:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Girls Kissing Girls

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable soft-porn video series. Article consists purely of a product listing taken from the producer's advertisements. No other sources except for a couple of nominations (not actual awards) for some porn-industry-internal awards; zero coverage independent of the industry's own publicity machinery. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note that several sub-articles are currently also nominated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Girls Kissing Girls 1: Young Lesbians in Love. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:21, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:30, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Only one nomination for an individual movie, none for an individual scene. Zero wins. I do see a couple of reviews for individual titles on the xcritic site, although that site doesn't seem to have a WP article, so no idea if it's useful, or just a paid PR site or puffed-up blog. A few stray mentions on blogs and forums. I just don't see evidence that meets WP:N. If better sourcing can be found, happy to revisit. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 13:59, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:PORNBIO says that a pornographic actor is considered notable if s/he "has received nominations for well-known awards in multiple years". This film series has been nominated for well-known awards in multiple years, so how is it different?  Erpert  Who is this guy? 17:37, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Response:
 * None of the individual titles in the series appear to be notable.
 * AVN best actor/actress, best newcomer awards? Okay, I'll give you "well-known" for those. XBIZ All-Girl Series of the Year? AVN Best All-Girl Series? With fifteeen series nominated every year? Exactly how many of AVN's girl-on-girl series advertisers did not get nominated, pray tell?
 * And, anyway, PORNBIO deals with people, not film series. I don't believe that there is a WP guideline on film series in general, let alone for porn series.
 * Lastly, whether or not the subject fits the guideline and, if so, meets the guideline, it fails the policy of WP:N, for lack of substantial coverage from multiple, independent WP:RS sources. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 14:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Response to your response:
 * That is why all the invidiual titles don't have their own articles.
 * The argument that fifteen series get nominated every year is irrelevant, as I see no guideline that says that such a stipulation makes an entire series non-notable.
 * The argument was brought up here as a reason to delete the article (by failing the guideline), but now you're pretty much saying the guideline doesn't qualify because WP:PORNBIO deals with people, not films. You can't have it both ways.
 * How are the AVN and XBIZ websites not independent sources? You even said that you saw some independent reviews.  Erpert  Who is this guy? 19:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Further responses to Erpert (the creator of this article):
 * I appreciate your conceding that none of the individual titles are notable.
 * You are avoiding the question. The guideline says "well-known", and I have pointed out that the specific awards that this series has won been nominated for are not well-known. If you can provide good evidence that XBIZ All-Girl Series of the Year and AVN Best All-Girl Series are "well-known", then I will change my mind.
 * You are wrong, I can have it both ways. I am arguing that the guideline does not apply to this series but that, even if it did, it fails to meet the guideline.
 * "You even said that you saw some independent reviews." No, I said that I saw some stray reviews of unknown reliability or independence. If you can demonstrate that xcritic.com is both, that would be definitely help the case.
 * "How are the AVN and XBIZ websites not independent sources?"
 * Per AVN Awards, "Awards often go to consistent advertisers in AVN."
 * Per XBIZ Awards, "The award nominations are submitted by clients, and the winners are voted for by XBiz staff, industry colleagues and participating organizations." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hobbes Goodyear (talk • contribs)
 * I didn't say none of the individual titles are notable; I said not all of them are. Get it right, please.
 * XBIZ and AVN Awards aren't well-known? The XBIZ Awards have been given out since 2003, and the AVN Awards have been given out since 1984! Maybe they aren't well-known to you.
 * I can't respond to that because what you said doesn't make any sense.
 * I posted some independent reviews in the Girls Kissing Girls 3 article...and before you jump to this conclusion, I used the staff reviews, not the customer reviews.  Erpert  Who is this guy? 07:09, 16 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment: All the above discussion is futile and a little bizarre, as it tries to apply WP:PORNBIO on something that is not a BIO... We have only a guideline for films and it is WP:NOTFILM. It requires Awards, not nominations.--Cavarrone (talk) 07:40, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, that guideline says that an award is one thing that may deem a film notable, not the only thing.  Erpert  Who is this guy? 03:57, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nom says it well: this is basically a listing, provided for by the company sources, with no evidence of notability. Drmies (talk) 04:00, 19 December 2011 (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.