Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jett Blakk

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. –Juliancolton ^Happy ^Holidays 01:00, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jett Blakk

Self-promotional, non-notable, nominated for award that's probably not "substantial". COI issues. SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 04:48, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No evidence of notability, award nomination notwithstanding. Unable to identify material coverage of the award in any mainstream news media, and only minimal coverage of it elsewhere. Bongo matic 06:25, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Luinfana (talk) 14:07, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Tabercil (talk) 05:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No assertion of notability. Tatarian (talk) 13:50, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Xbiz is generally considered a second tier award, and the Erotic Gay Video award may or may not be as well [1] also [2], but the 4 GAYVN award nominations [3], [4] are definitely significant. 3 best screenplay and 1 best director nomination from the highest award in the field meets WP:PORNBIO a/o WP:BIO additional criteria easily. Horrorshowj (talk) 17:53, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Although it's pretty obvious Mr Blakk wrote this article himself, I feel the award does make him notable enough. I would however fully support you guys removing all the unreferenced stuff per BLP and self promo. I'd do it now, but can't really as I've just voted. Ryan4314 (talk) 03:06, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 01:25, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as meeting WP:PORNBIO. Tabercil (talk) 01:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry? How does Jett Blakk meet WP:PORNBIO? If you mean that Jett Blakk won the XBIZ award, the only reason that award is listed in Category:Adult movie awards is because the author of both articles created them on the same day - a COI at best, vandalism at worst. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:56, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The XBiz Award may be minor but the GayVN and Grabby Awards are significant porn industry awards. • Gene93k (talk) 08:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly as Gene93k says... GayVN is perhaps the leading award in this specific field. Tabercil (talk) 17:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Except that it's not true? The only "win" listed on the article is false: [5] - the others are simply nominations. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:PORNBIO and WP:CREATIVE with critical attention for work. COI issues are a matter of cleanup. • Gene93k (talk) 08:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:PORNBIO and GayVN awards. Epbr123 (talk) 12:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it meets WP:PORNBIO right now I suppose perhaps this will change later as the guideline develops JBsupreme (talk) 16:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets WP:PORNBIO and WP:CREATIVE. May need cleanup due to COI issues, but that is not for AfD. — neuro^(talk) 03:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kommentar May I remind the !votes above that the person in question has not actually won any PORNBIO awards that would make him notable? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:50, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Doesn't matter either way as Jett still qualifies under the general "Any Biography" criteria: "The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them." (emphasis mine). Tabercil (talk) 13:19, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - So twice is "often"? I still don't see how he meets BIO or PORNBIO. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.