Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Point of view pornography


 * 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   merge to Gonzo pornography.  Sandstein  20:11, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Point of view pornography

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable OR. Searches for "Point of view pornography" and "Hamedori" fail to turn up multiple substantial RS coverage. Epeefleche (talk) 21:30, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep and Merge with Gonzo pornography (as suggested in the Gonzo p. page). I agree that the current references are not the best and that the article needs some cleanup but the subject in itself appears notable enough as it is covered in several books such as Carnal Resonance: Affect and Online Pornography by Susanna Paasonen (many references, particularly pages 167-173), Porn 101: eroticism, pornography, and the First Amendment by James Elias (in the chapter "To Create Identification"), the French book Bouquin Coquin & Taquin d’une Catin et d’un Libertin (pages 202-203), Naked Ambition: An R-Rated Look at an X-Rated Industry by Michael Grecco, Lonn Friend & Rob Hill, Good Porn: A Woman's Guide by Erika Lust, "Headpress Volume 24" (pages 16-19), The end of cinema as we know it: American film in the nineties by Jon Lewis, 映画・音楽・芸能の本全情報 2000-2004, Modern Thought: Volume 23, and even WTF? Women by Gregory Bergman & Jodi Miller. Cavarrone (talk) 13:40, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 11:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)




 * Delete - Keeping with the spirit of the content: this is essentially Original Research humping the leg of a Dictionary Definition. POV pornography is not a specific encyclopedic concept, the subject of multiple instances of substantial, independently published coverage in reliable sources — it is "pornography shot with a camera angle simulating the perspective of one participant in a sexual act." Mail that to Urban Dictionary. Pornography is swell, but this is not an encyclopedic topic nor the place for such an original essay. Carrite (talk) 16:37, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * * Keep and Merge with Gonzo pornography (as suggested in the Gonzo p. page) -- I agree with Cavarrone. This subject does have not-insignificant weight but is not going to be unique enough to warrant having a separate page from Gonzo. MyNameWasTaken (talk) 18:05, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 14:03, 9 February 2012 (UTC)




 * keep and merge with Gonzo pornography per reasons above Pass a Method   talk  13:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge per Cavarrone. The sourced do fail to give a thorough indication of notability, but I think Cavarrone pretty much cleared that up. ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 15:08, 12 February 2012 (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.