Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Landon


 * 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. Nja 247 19:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Joe Landon

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Lack of notability (has only five porn films to his credit); no references; article reads like a puff piece written by a publicity agent or a starstruck fan LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 20:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep This needs work but even if there is only five films, he's got five awards for them which meets pornbio guidelines. This needs to be sourced of course but that shuldn't be too ... hard. -- Banj e  b oi   01:37, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. How sad that Wikipedia even has pornbio guidelines! He made five films in four years, and hasn't worked since 2002. How can he possibly be considered notable enough to warrant an article, even one as badly written and referenced as this one is? MovieMadness (talk) 20:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Ummm, how sad we have guidelines? We do so to help those unenlightened have a clue as to what content can be considered noatble or not. WP:PORNBIO clearly states if they have won a major award - he's won five. If he only worked for 2 months it would still meet notability. -- Banj e  b oi   08:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * How does one determine how major a "Grabby Award" is? Regardless, the article is filled with POV statements sounding like someone's J/O fantasy ("He has won several awards due to his photogenic good looks and acting ability;" "He is known for his youth, muscular build, strong facial forms, and blond hair;" "However, he is perhaps most known for his 10 inch, slightly curved, circumcised penis") and very few facts, starting with date and place of birth and continuing with the story about his first film, are verified by reliable sources. LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 17:22, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The various AVN awards meet RS. Remember... they are genre specific.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Re: LiteraryMaven -- WP:PORNBIO is the going standard for these types of articles. If you think the standards are too low, you can register your complaints at the talk page for it. I myself wonder about how hard it is to get these adult industry awards, but pornbio is the current standard (and there are plenty of articles which actually don't even pass its generous standards). Wikignome0529 (talk) 22:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The gay porn industry is actually quite huge and, believe it or not, an industry panel sets standards and reviews nominees. Do I personally watch, agree, dispute or otherwise care, no. But they do, did, don't and do and ergo this is agreed upon industry award. -- Banj e  b oi   02:42, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep an article and send to WP:CLEANUP to address POV. Like it or not, he passes WP:PORNBIO with alacrity.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree. He passes only one out of four WP:PORNBIO requirements, i.e., he has won awards listed in Category:Adult movie awards. As for the rest, he is not a Playboy Playmate, there is nothing in the article to suggest he made "unique contributions to a specific pornographic genre," "starred in an iconic, groundbreaking or blockbuster feature," or is "a member of an industry Hall of Fame," and there's no indication the five films he made were "featured multiple times in notable mainstream media." Is passing only one out of four sufficient reason to keep? LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 15:16, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * With respect you may be misreading that, it doesn't say they must meet all those requirements, it states - A person is generally notable if they meet any of the following standards. -- Banj e  b oi   21:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:PORNBIO also says "meeting one or more [requirements] does not guarantee that a subject should be included". The only references in this article prove Joe Landon won the awards that are listed. Nothing else in the article is proven. A lot of it is POV. I have a feeling there is absolutely nothing notable about this person even to people who have an interest in this type of thing. LargoLarry (talk) 13:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Seemingly non-notable. Nothing above sways me. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 05:35, 30 April 2009 (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.