Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Till Kraemer


 * 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. Missvain (talk) 16:55, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Till Kraemer

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Editor created a page for himself. No evidence of notability. Porn awards do not count towards notability anymore.  D r e a m Focus  21:33, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  21:37, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  21:37, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  21:38, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  21:39, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  21:39, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  21:39, 21 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete Blatant COI editing and available sources fail WP:GNG since porn industry sources do not count towards notability since the deprecation of WP:PORNBIO. Kges1901 (talk) 21:42, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

No, porn awards do not count, but continuous press coverage in mainstream media since 2001 and major acting parts in television shows do. Dream Focus is already engaged here and there where he already tried to discredit my contributions and my notability. --Till Kraemer (talk) 21:48, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Did you get any coverage other than someone online or a porn channel talking you to about porn? Which notable shows did you have a significant role in?  Something not porn related.   D r e a m Focus  21:57, 21 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't talk to you anymore. You are clearly not listening. I won't repeat myself over and over again just for you. Pretty much everything is listed in the press coverage link I already posted. And yes, mainstream media like Klub Konkret, Hamburger Morgenpost and Hamburger Abendblatt talk with me about porn, no shit, who would have thought? I'm a porn star. Your "argument" is like saying: "But Jeff Bezos only talks about Amazon, that doesn't count". And regarding the shows I already posted the IMDb link but apparently you are not willing to click it. I'm out of here. I'm done wasting my time with you. Enjoy the rest of the discussion. --Till Kraemer (talk) 22:11, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Taboo fields of work are often shunned from mainstream outlets, yes, but those facing such adverse conditions should still be treated with respect as opposed to potentially being chastised. But that's just my two cents and perhaps I misinterpreted the tone.  —  Godsy (TALK CONT ) 09:51, 24 December 2020 (UTC)


 * delete fails WP:PORNBIO both by deprecated and current standards. He never won any awards, never received coverage (being nominated isn't a win and doesn't confer notability) and all the supposed coverage is primary/press releases or interviews. GRINCHIDICAE🎄  22:15, 21 December 2020 (UTC)


 * There are literally no press releases and yea, no shit, these are mostly interviews, what's the problem? Also, since nobody clicks my links apparently, I'm gonna list some examples of coverage here:


 * Akte 06 (Sat.1), Endstation Pornofilm: Wenn Männer keine Arbeit finden
 * Akte 06 (Sat.1), Pornostar sucht Partner: Auf der Suche nach der großen Liebe
 * Bild, Pornopedia: Sexstar Till Kraemer (32) gründet geile Enzyklopädie
 * Bild, Früher Sex-Drehs, heute Waschzwang: Ein Pornostar geht in Rente
 * Cosmopolitan, Was ist richtig guter Sex?
 * Cosmopolitan, Cosmo Sex Booklet
 * Hamburger Abendblatt, Wie tickt die Porno-Industrie?
 * DRadio Wissen, Eine Stunde Liebe - Pornoindustrie: Eiweiß und Fake-Orgasmen
 * Forum der Europäer (Arte), Deutschland: Hochleistungssex
 * Frau von Heute, Ex-Pornostar Till Kraemer (36) packt aus: Es war eine geile Zeit
 * Klub Konkret (EinsPlus), Zur Sache, Schätzchen - Oversexed and Underfucked
 * Jolie, Mein Freund ist ein Pornostar
 * Men's Health, Feuchte Räume
 * Petra, Sex-Tipps von Profis
 * WDR 5 Leonardo, Über die Wirkung von Pornographie

I also have a leading part in four seasons of the TV show Sexy Alm (Sport1, also released on DVD). --Till Kraemer (talk) 22:46, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Will you please stop bluedgeoning these AFDs and badgering every voter? You have failed to read WP:RS and specifically Independent sources. Interviews aren't independent, they aren't coverage of you because it's you talking about yourself and your interests. GRINCHIDICAE🎄  23:06, 21 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete Seems to be an autobiography, supported by sources that are primary, unreliable, or that give no depth of coverage. I'm not seeing sources thay would pass the GNG bar. Girth Summit  (blether)  22:45, 21 December 2020 (UTC)


 * "That give no depth of coverage"? Did you even click one of those links? Use Google Translate if needed. --Till Kraemer (talk) 22:59, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , WP:INTERVIEWs are usually considered as primary sources for the purposes of establishing notability. What GNG calls for is multiple sources which tick all of the necessary boxes: reliable, independent, secondary, and depth of coverage. Sources which tick some, but not all, don't cut it. Best Girth Summit  (blether)  23:17, 21 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - Fails PORNBIO. Non-notable. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:45, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Pornbio was a horrid criteria that served to create inordinately high numbers of articles in Wikipedia connected with porn. It was deprecated. What is needed now is passing the slightly more stringent rules of GNG. The weight of inertia however has kept on Wikipedia a lot of unjustified articles related to people involved in pornography.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:04, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Self-promotional biography, no actual notability established despite the citation spam above. Zaathras (talk) 02:09, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete we must presever Wikipedia's ban on creating articles on yourself.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:02, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - I will attempt to help build consensus, as this discussion caught my eye due to the repetitive arguments supplied by Mr. Kraemer. I agree with the "delete" voters above on the lack of independent and reliable coverage. Kraemer certainly appears in a lot of online media but it is largely self-promotional and unreliable, and no longer eligible for notability after the recent rejection of the WP:PORNBIO standards. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 21:37, 27 December 2020 (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.