Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Renee Pornero


 * 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. Close call on this one, but the "rebuttal" of Guy1980 about Hullaballoo Wolfowitz concern about the sources that were linked by Morbidthoughts basically confirms what most of the delete commentators (not David's) commented on her not meeting WP:GNG/WP:PORNBIO. I don't find the keep commentators on the available sources persuasive as well, rather avoiding the question and focusing on "her awards" and the source about her being Austrian most famous porn star, which "might" have tipped it over to no consensus was based on a radio show, which isn't an independent, secondary source of the subject. With the still unclear concerns about the sources and considering this is a BLP as well, policy based consensus is to delete. Secret account 02:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Renee Pornero

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:PORNBIO as the sole award she won is not a "well-known and significant industry award". The Eroticline Awards have since been discontinued and the winners were chosen by  "a jury and by a ballot of webmasters or registered users of several German erotic websites". Finnegas (talk) 16:23, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Finnegas (talk) 16:51, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Finnegas (talk) 16:54, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Finnegas (talk) 16:54, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Neutral (but leaning toward delete). First I'd have to determine the notability of the Eroticline Awards (the article about it is unsourced).  Erpert  Who is this guy? 07:26, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: The (medien) eroticline awards are basically the Venus Award which are still ongoing. It was renamed because the sponsors of the awards changed during 2004-2009. It's like how the names of stadiums change when the sponsorship deals change. Morbidthoughts (talk) 18:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * How notable are those awards though? That article isn't sourced either.  Erpert  Who is this guy? 04:54, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * If there is doubts whether the awards are notable, surely we can conclude they are not a "well-known and significant industry award", which is the Criteria to satisfy WP:PORNBIO? Finnegas (talk) 11:48, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Anyone know German? or can ask a German how well known they are per WP:IDONTKNOWIT? Morbidthoughts (talk) 14:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Theopolisme ( talk )  00:58, 16 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - FYI, I've recently edited the main article that's in question here (as well as the "parent articles", Eroticline Awards & Venus Award, that are also in question above). I can see how one could view the Renee Pornero article as borderline from a USA point-of-view when it comes to PORNBIO, but it seems that the "Best Female Performer (Europe)" is a "well-known or significant industry award" in Europe (as a part of "the world's largest erotic trade fair") & it's received attention through at least AVN magazine in the USA. That's not even considering the other award nominations (one of which is "only" a scene award) that Ms. Pornero has also received. Both the Eroticline Awards & Venus Award articles could use some more work for sure though. Guy1890 (talk) 03:58, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Living and working in Germany I've never heard of the award, and I used to live right above a sex shop. No one I asked from the shop (which is part of a company that produces adult videos) seemed to thing it was an "industry standard" award.  I can't find any mention of them other then a facebook page by them, and the listing of the award on a winner's bio.  Caffeyw (talk) 07:32, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete more or less per nom's sound analysis. Per PORNBIO, the recently added scene nomination does not contribute to notability, and by previously established consensus, the CAVR "nomination" (which reflects merely receiving four votes in a dubious online poll) fails the well-known/significant standard. Trade show/trade association awards generally lack the independence and significance required to indicate notability (see Articles for deletion/Automotive Dealership Excellence Awards (2nd nomination) for an example of the principle routinely applied in a different industry.) Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 10:55, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The "Trade show/trade association awards generally lack the independence and significance required to indicate notability"...is a baloney statement, since many of the adult film awards (like the AVN Awards, XBIZ Awards, etc.) are basically trade show awards. Guy1890 (talk) 00:27, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Prototypical porn "bio" with zero actual biographical content but a photo. Typical. Zero reliable sourcing as well, clear failure of GNG. Awards are not significant, a Howard Stern appearance not significant. Nada. Carrite (talk) 16:04, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - I believe she passes the GNG from the Google News hits. She seems to be an Austrian celebrity considering the other gnews hits that just name drop her. According to Austrian press,, she is described as the most famous Austrian porn star. Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe that the Google News hits do not constitute "Significant coverage" Per WP:GNG. Being the most famous Austrian Porn star is not much of a claim to fame considering there is only one other "performer" in Category:Austrian female pornographic film actors. Finnegas (talk) 09:41, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Another variation of WP:OTHERSTUFF. Just because there are only 2 wikipedia article on Austrian porn actors at the moment does not say anything about their relative fame. Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:43, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * "Being the most famous Austrian Porn star is not much of a claim to fame considering there is only one other 'performer' in Category:Austrian female pornographic film actors"...which you're also trying to have deleted at the moment. Guy1890 (talk) 00:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes that is correct but I fail to see how this is relevant to this discussion. 11:20, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep, some decent coverage in German language mainstream press plus a borderline notable award. Borderline in both ways, but the sum of the two things makes me lean more towards a keep than towards deletion. Cavarrone 10:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per Wikipedia notability guidelines for porn people. WP:PORNBIO. Herzlicheboy (talk) 21:16, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you please clarify how you believe she passes WP:PORNBIO? Finnegas (talk) 19:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Nominated or won several major pornographic awards. They don't have to be AVN per se.  Herzlicheboy (talk) 20:21, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * By well-established consensus, the CAVR fail the PORNBIO standard (they're based on an often-low-participation online poll - and in this case the nomination amounted to nothing more than receiving a whopping four votes in that poll. By the terms of PORNBIO itself, the scene-related award lacks the necessary significance. That leaves only the dubious, short-lived trade show trophy; the claim of "several major pornographic awards" is transparently false. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:06, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I said nominations for major awards. Stop being so tendentious. Herzlicheboy (talk) 21:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete There's way too much coverage of pornography on Wikipedia; deleting the biographies of marginally notable performers would be a good start in cleaning out the stables. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:22, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not censored and arguments that really amount to "I just don't like it" really aren't going to carry much weight here. Guy1890 (talk) 04:10, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Au contraire; I'm just trying to move our coverage of this distasteful subject back to neutrality by counteracting the pro-porn systematic bias. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 23:56, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * In other words, what I said...thanks for confirming that. Guy1890 (talk) 00:01, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Not really. Just ask yourself: if this were an article on an amateur-level actress of equal notability, would we be hosting it? Pornographic films are generally low-circulation affairs, equivalent to indie/art/cult films in terms of viewership. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:08, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * "Pornographic films are generally low-circulation affairs, equivalent to indie/art/cult films in terms of viewership." Got a source for that opinion? I didn't think so. Look, you've been exceeding honest about your opinion of the adult film genre in general, which is actually quite refreshing...considering some that routinely vote "delete" in these kind of AfDs probably share the exact same opinion but are too fearful to actually say it in the open. Guy1890 (talk) 04:16, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. Ukrained2012 (talk) 17:25, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 20:10, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment to closing admin. How many times is this going to be relisted? This has been going on since 9 August (20 days now).  Looks like a clear "non consensus" to me.  What's the point of keeping this open so long?  Is someone hoping for a specific result?  You all agree? Herzlicheboy (talk) 06:45, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure that AfDs can be relisted up to two times before they must be closed in some way, shape or form. It doesn't happen always, but it's not that unusual. Uninvolved administrators sometimes have a hard time discerning consensus in these types of discussions. Guy1890 (talk) 19:18, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. I believe that careful examination of the sources cited by Morbidthoughts, above, shows a failure to satisfy the GNG. The source which characterizes her as a "famous" Austrian porn star appears to be, per its de-wiki article, an online "magazine" prsdenting volunteer user contributions, apparently failing RS requirements. The first source listed turns out to be a radio station's listing of its own schedule, not an independent source. The second quotes Pornero, but provides no coverage regarding her beyond her occupation. The third source is clearly unacceptable - it's a retail site/Amazon affiliate which also hawks VOD and video rental services. These sources do not amount to independent, substantive coverage. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:06, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "The source which characterizes her as a 'famous' Austrian porn star appears to be, per its de-wiki article, an online 'magazine' prsdenting volunteer user contributions" The source in question from far above is actually just an interview that was done with the subject of this Wikipedia article, which is currently only used as a citation in that article very sparingly.
 * "The first source listed turns out to be a radio station's listing of its own schedule, not an independent source. The second quotes Pornero, but provides no coverage regarding her beyond her occupation." Neither of these websites are used in the article in question.
 * "The third source is clearly unacceptable"...and the info that's it is currently used for as a citation in the article in question (that the subject here appeared in the 2008 documentary Porno Unplugged) is further substantiated by this subject's IMDb entry (under appearance as "Self"). Guy1890 (talk) 23:16, 1 September 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.