Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcus Mojo


 * 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. The consensus seems clear enough after the relisting  DGG ( talk ) 04:06, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Marcus Mojo

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails PORNBIO and the GNG. No qualifying awards, just nominations; "Best Website" is not an individual award and in any event reflects the achievement of the website designer, not the site subject. No independent reliable sourcing. No reliably sourced biographical content. Tendentiously deprodded without explanation or article improvement by the usual suspect. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 23:53, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:08, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 11 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep passes notability the porn actor has won 2 awards in his career and has been nominated for may others, in the porn industry Best Website awards always go to the person who stars in the websites content. Redsky89 (talk) 06:30, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep the same editor tried proposing deletion when the article was first made and was rejected. the article uses many independent reliable sources such as xbiz.com, Queer Me Now, and Gayporntimes.com. and as pointed out the Best Website award goes to the star of the website (this is the porn industry awards not a technology award). Dman41689 (talk) 07:54, 11 November 2015 (UTC) Struck blocked sock puppet of Redsky89. • Gene93k (talk) 23:52, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * There is no independent, reliable sourcing here. The XBIZ sources are obvious press releases/presskit pieces, as is the jrlchartsonline source. Queer Me Now, Gayporntimes.com, and GayDemon are self-published sources/blogs that can't be used in BLPs. This is just another porn faux bio, cobbled together from promotional material, and the tinfoil trophies from nonnotable awardgivers don't confer notability to subjects that fail the GNG by so wide a margin. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 19:18, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as no evidence of notability, fails PORNBIO & GNG. – Davey 2010 Talk 00:33, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note to Hullaballoo Wolfowitz those sources are independent sources and are used on many other porn articles on Wikipedia and to Davey2010 evidence of notability is that he is an award winner. Redsky89 (talk) 05:44, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note if a website is using press releases/presskit pieces then its a reliable source I don't see how it wouldn't be. it seems that the person who nominated the article has a personal vendetta against this page or porn stars having wiki pages since they nominated a lot of porn related articles for deletion. Dman41689 (talk) 06:00, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * They've nominated 250 porn pages for deletion this year alone and only in porn, after 3 years of badging down the rules. you can make your own decisions on that one, ha. Don't even try to resist, it's a lost cause. GuzzyG (talk) 08:48, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete per nom. Deb (talk) 09:31, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jenks24 (talk) 13:14, 18 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Note &mdash; blocked as sock of . -- slakr  \ talk / 03:03, 21 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - two winner - meets of PORNBIO. Subtropical -man   talk   (en-2)   21:36, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails PORNBIO as the nominator states. Only individual award win is very obscure. Lacks significant coverage by independent reliable sources. Coverage consists of blog posts and republished press releases. • Gene93k (talk) 00:02, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per nominator & Gene93k. Finnegas (talk) 19:07, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as inadequately sourced blp Spartaz Humbug! 00:05, 30 November 2015 (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.