- 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. Alright, this one is complex and I expect it won't reach unanimous agreement (both on the discussion and my closure of it), so I shall make a few points garnered from the discussion:
- It's pretty clear that the article does not meet WP:GNG - and no, as pointed out press releases typically don't count towards that for the most part.
- The main argument is whether the XRCO Awards are
a well-known and significant industry award
for the purpose of WP:PORNBIO - a separate discussion is going on on Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Proposed Change to PORNBIO about that section, so the whole guideline appears to be in flux right now but leaning towards stricter standards. There does not seem to be a question about whether these awards were indeed given. I see some other awards are discussed on the article but very little (and a little ambiguous) discussion on them.
- On the question whether the XRCO awards satisfy the PORNBIO criterion, most of the arguments in that regard are just assertions, or citing precedent in other AfDs in favour of keeping (some other AfDs were apparently "delete" though, as well), whether niche is a pro or a con for counting them in, or prior discussion (mostly unlinked to) on WT:BIO as against, or but the numerical preponderance is on the side of the "no" camp. Also, Steve Quinn and in lesser measure others have laid out arguments that the awards are not significant enough, with not much detailed disagreement.
- Finally and perhaps most importantly, arguably meeting the PORNBIO criteria is not by default a "is notable"/keep reason, as said on WP:BIO, something also emphasized by a number of delete !voters who also noted relevant statements such as WP:NRVE and WP:WHYN, statements that have not been disagreed with, which is especially concerning on a WP:BLP about a sensitive subject matter.
Regards, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:23, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]