Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Adriano


 * 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. Nom was withdrawn several days ago, but not SK-eligible due to other deletion arg. (non-admin closure) czar   &middot;   &middot;  05:48, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Mike Adriano

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article's tone requires cleanup for one thing, and though it is a sourced BLP, the reference given does not even mention his name (WP:V) For the source listed there is a link to a "full list" which also does not mention his name. CSD withdrawn by me per reasonable article creator's request. Per WP:BEFORE, I tried to fix it, but Google News or Google Books failed to reveal any significant coverage therefore failing #3 of WP:PORNBIO and WP:SIGCOV. He obviously exists, as Google reveals numerous results coming up for him regarding his works, but nothing that can be cited (they are all sites to watch porn). According to 29th AVN Awards and 30th AVN Awards he has been nominated for four awards, but one is a scene award, therefore failing #1 of the pornbio guideline (he has to win an award, or be nominated for several - three is not several). The nominations in those articles are also not sourced. He also does not appear to satisfy #2 of pornbio, no information could be found regarding his influences/unique contributions. &mdash; kikichugirl  inquire 21:58, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Withdrawing nomination per arguments below and WP:SNOW. All issues addressed in my nom have been fixed enough for me, even if some improvement to the article would be nice. If this article were to just now be submitted and be seen by me as a NPP, then I wouldn't nominate it for deletion, so it is only reasonable that I withdraw now. &mdash; kikichugirl  inquire 21:39, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Herzlicheboy (talk) 01:05, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


 * 'Delete ' unless WP:RS can be found to demonstrate genuine notability. I have tried and failed to find any. I have previously placed a BLPPROD on this article and was content to let that run its course, but, since we are here, am as content to !vote for deletion based upon ack of notability. Fiddle   Faddle  22:03, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep since WP:RS now exist. !vote altered after seeing them. Fiddle   Faddle  07:28, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete . Comes up short on WP:GNG, WP:PORNBIO and WP:FILMMAKER. GNG: Only coverage is in the trade press. XBiz coverage reads like press releases. Adult Video News coverage is reprinted press releases. PORNBIO: A 2013 XRCO nomination for best male performer and a 2012 scene-related AVN nomination are all I could find. Not enough. FILMMAKER: I found a 2012 AVN Win for best oral release. Not enough. • Gene93k (talk) 23:46, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Additional comment. I added what I could find to the article. A closer reading of the scene-related awards and nominations credit Adriano as director. Notability as a filmmaker is borderline, but I can be persuaded to change my vote if more evidence emerges. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Changing vote to weak keep. With additional awards and nominations added by Guy1890, the subject just passes WP:FILMMAKER criterion #4. Multiple works have received significant critical attention. If the article is kept, the unsourced fluff in the article needs to go, even if that means reducing the article to a bare stub. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:TNT as well as the above arguments. Even the subject were shown to be notable, virtually all the text that could be retained consists of the subject's name, various forms of the verb "to be", and the occasional definite or indefinite article. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 00:35, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply. WP:TNT doesn't justify deletion when the subject is notable. Herzlicheboy (talk) 04:59, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly meets the requirements of WP:PORNBIO, which state, in part: "Has won a well-known and significant industry award, or has been nominated for such an award several times." The article subject has won 3 AVN awards and has been nominated for 4 in total, as well as having been nominated for 2 XRCO awards.  Clear pass. Herzlicheboy (talk) 01:27, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly meets WP:PORNBIO for having been nominated for several awards. Several means multiple.  Check the dictionary definition  2a: "more than one" b: more than two".   D r e a m Focus  01:32, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment/addendum. Not only has the article subject received several nominations for AVN and XRCO awards, but he indeed won three separate AVN awards at the 2012 ceremony. Clear keep.  I respectfully suggest the nominatrix withdraw this AFD. Herzlicheboy (talk) 01:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You might want to search for an official webpage for the guy, and find information about him to add more information to the article. The article isn't even a day old yet, so is fine for a stub.  You could add a list of notable films the person has been in.   D r e a m Focus  01:48, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Although like I said I'm not too good at using search engines.  Question:  wouldn't one's own "home page" be considered a non reliable (self serving) source? Herzlicheboy (talk) 02:04, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The article subject won exactly zero individual awards at that ceremony. Scene awards don't count; "release" awards don't count. The PORNBIO criteria apply only to awards for work as performers; otherwise, the GNG is the primary standard, and right now the subject appears to fall short of that by a wide margin. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 02:39, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I would advise against adding a complete list of films that this subject (or any other subject in the adult film industry) has either performed in or directed. We generally try to stay away from complete film lists in an article in favor of just having some external links to well-known sources for adult film listings (like IMDb, IAFD or AFDB) or, at the very most, a partial film listing in the article of some more notable films only.
 * "Question: wouldn't one's own 'home page' be considered a non reliable (self serving) source?" There are some things that a subject's homepage can be used for as a citation. For instance, notable infomation that only they would know about for sure (like being gay, lesbian, etc.), but, in general, I would try and find other independent sources that substantiate any notable info that's contained on a subject's "official site". Guy1890 (talk) 04:28, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep - "This article's tone requires cleanup for one thing"...AfD is not cleanup. "he has to win an award, or be nominated for several - three is not several"...as has been basically stated above, the relevant standard in PORNBIO is: "Has won a well-known and significant industry award, or has been nominated for such an award several times." In this case, the subject here has been nominated for at least 7 major adult awards in just the last few years. As for the "'release' awards not counting", I'm not aware of any guidelines that state that at all, and the above number of 7 major awards doesn't include the 2 award wins & 9 other nominations for Best Releases that this person here has under their belt as a director, so it really doesn't matter in any event. Does this article here need more work? Yes, but it currently meets the relevant criteria for it to be kept. Guy1890 (talk) 04:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - I see more awards now. It now appears to satisfy at the very least, #1 of WP:PORNBIO. &mdash; kikichugirl  inquire 04:32, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep, even not considering the less significant awards having been nominated for "Director of the Year" and "Male Performer of the Year" clearly satisfies PORNBIO requirements. Cavarrone 04:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Additional comment: However, I am still of the opinion that it does not satisfy WP:GNG - there isn't any mainstream coverage on him, only in porn-related areas. Per pornbio, the scene awards don't count for #1 however. Per Gene93k, if the article were kept, all of the fluff needs to go. I am keeping my nom right now. And to clear things up, is the article's creator. &mdash;  kikichugirl  inquire 04:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply. I believe that WP:PORNBIO supercedes GNG here. Herzlicheboy (talk) 04:59, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It's basically always been my feeling that if one meets PORNBIO, then by inclusion, they also meet the necessary GNG requirements of "a topic receiving significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". "there isn't any mainstream coverage on him, only in porn-related areas"...which is not very uncommon at all for adult film-related subjects. You're not going to find many articles about adult industry individuals in the New York Times, etc....it does happen, but it's kind of rare. Also, no one (that knows what they are talking about above) is really talking about "scene awards" and them possibly meeting PORNBIO. As for "all of the fluff needing to go"...it's basically all gone now. I don't have a problem if the AfD nominator here doesn't want to withdraw their nomination, but this will likely be a pretty obvious keep for the closing administrator. Guy1890 (talk) 05:12, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Three non-scene-related award noms in different years (Director of the Year in 2011, Best Director in 2012 and Male Performer of the Year in 2013) more than satisfy point #1 of WP:PORNBIO. (The article creator might want to read WP:BETTER if s/he wants to write more articles in the future, but as Guy1890 pointed out, AfD is not cleanup.)  Erpert  Who is this guy? 08:47, 5 August 2013 (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.