Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sid Deuce


 * 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. Courcelles 00:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Sid Deuce

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:PORNBIO and WP:ENT, no indication the subject can satisfy the GNG or any other relevant SNG. No award noms, no mainstream appearances reported; no GNews hits, no nontrivial GBooks hits (passing mentions). Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:39, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep digital coverage is pretty limited, but i suspect most of it was done in the print days. Especially when it says: Performer Credits: 189 Titles; Director Credits: 21 Titles. Stuartyeates (talk) 00:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. By well-established consensus, the number of credits a subject may report is not sufficient to demonstrate notability; "prolific" was once a WP:PORNBIO standard, but was removed without great controversy. The subject was active in the industry from 1995-2003, well beyond the purely print era., and a great many contemporaries have demonstrated notability with adequate coverage. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 03:01, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. There used to be a 100-film standard, Stuart, but "well-established" "non-controversial" consensus threw that out. ("Well-established consensus" means, HW and a couple other editors. "Non-controversial" means, "I hope you don't ask me to link the discussion".) If you take the trouble to look at the archives of the "Porn project" back when people actually worked on articles in this subject-area, most editors were actually trying to lower it. Fortunately, those editors have all been driven out of the project by HW, a couple other like him, and a couple Neville Chamberlain-types. Dekkappai (talk) 05:09, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete The AfD creator is the only major contributor in the field of pr0n, and his opinions should be accepted as consensus without debate. Also, articles on this sort of person only encourage this sort of behavior. As the Shrine of the Sum of Human Knowledge, Wikipedia should be in the business of uplifting humanity, not dragging it down in the gutter. Dekkappai (talk) 02:37, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. By that argument, should we delete Adolf Hitler too? Stuartyeates (talk) 03:13, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Reply Stuart, if some guy is thinking about committing genocide, mass-murder, or even just a little massacre in order to get himself an article at Wikipedia, and he then becomes aware of our Deletion policies-- BLP1E in particular would remove such an article-- and because of that knowledge of our strict inclusion standards then decides not to commit this atrocity, I would say we as Wikipedians could hold our heads up proudly. Dekkappai (talk) 03:23, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - The notability criteria for adult film persons is at Notability_(people). Sid Deuce does not appear to meet any of the criteria listed there.  If an editor wants to keep this article, they should review that Notability guideline and provide sources here that demonstrate that Sid Deuce meets one of the criteria.  --Noleander (talk) 05:07, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:PORNBIO and WP:RS. Not a value judgment, just acknowledging apparent lack of notability unless significantly better sources can be found.   Rich wales (talk · contribs) 05:14, 24 July 2011 (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.