Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rod Fontana


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 17:51, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Rod Fontana

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable male pornstar (males should be held to a higher standard than the females, in my opinion). He has no awards. He is not the Hall of Fame. He has one mainstream appearance in the NYTimes about his supposed retirement. However, that article became invalided by his return to porn and by his claim that the NYTimes misrepresented him. Therefore, Fontana fails WP:GNG Redban (talk) 19:25, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:00, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:02, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:02, 10 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. The subject is member of the AVN Hall of Fame, despite what the nominator states. The article has a dead link, but that's an issue for cleanup. Passes WP:PORNBIO. • Gene93k (talk) 20:04, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The WP:Pornbio says at the top, "meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included." Look at the list of AVN Hall of Famers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_AVN_Hall_of_Fame They began inducting members in 1995, yet they already have over 200 inductees (count 'em -- over 200). By comparison, the MLB Hall of Fame has been active since the 1940s, and only 240 players have been inducted. The AVN Hall of Fame is a sham, and we shouldn't base notability solely on a person's inclusion therein. I believe the NY Times article is suspect, thereby making this article fail WP:GNG. Redban (talk) 21:00, 10 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per Gene93k. While some porn "hall of famers" have so little relikable coverage that their articles should be redirect to the relevant list page, a NYTimes profile, even a flawed one, is almost always a demonstration of notability. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 20:17, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes PORNBIO and GNG. New York Times article is not flawed or invalid because he unretired. It's not an obituary. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:53, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Passes WP:PORNBIO. This AfD along with all others started by Redban were started out of frustration for the recent deletion of Audrey Bitoni, one of Redban's favorite porn stars. During Bitoni's AfD, he stated "Either this page remains or you remove 99% of the pornstar biographies on Wikipedia". That is his only motivation for starting these AfDs. We aren't going to delete all porn star biography articles from Wikipedia, especially those that pass WP:PORNBIO, just because Redban is upset that we no longer have an article for his favorite porn star. I also think it's preposterous to suggest that "males should be held to a higher standard than the females". Perhaps from Redban's own point of view Audrey Bitoni is more notable than Rod Fontana, but WP:IKNOWIT and WP:IDONTKNOWIT are arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Rebecca1990 (talk) 07:00, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, invalid and plainly inaccurate rationale for deletion, subject passes PORNBIO and very likely GNG, I have to agree with Rebecca1990 this looks like a disruptive nom, please do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Cavarrone 10:01, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep and close AfD.--Milowent • hasspoken 17:00, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - Clearly passes WP:PORNBIO + WP:GNG. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  17:32, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - win, so meets the requirements. Subtropical -man   talk   (en-2)   21:02, 14 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep I previously closed this as a speedy keep and it was reverted as a "inappropriate and premature NAC". I still stand by the original decision and hate to pile on, but this is a clear speedy. Dusti</b>*Let's talk!* 04:46, 16 December 2014 (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.