Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arpad Miklos

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. ✗plicit 12:40, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arpad Miklos

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The only sources from reputable sites (1, 2) only really mention his suicide. The other sources are just publicity. Subject doesn't seem notable to me. Ficaia (talk) 11:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This AfD debate was not added to the daily log. It is now listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2022 January 12. • Gene93k (talk) 04:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:12, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:12, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:12, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:12, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:15, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Not a lot of coverage, per the usual with porn peformers, but there are non-porn sources like this Out article (1) that assert notability in his field, both as a porn star and escort, and had an unusually long career for gay porn star standards. GoldenAgeFan1 (talk) 17:54, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:38, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:37, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very weak delete: I know this isn't a strongly policy-based argument, hence the "very weak", but: if all an article has for WP:RS is sources that describe the subject's death by suicide... I think we should delete this. -- asilvering (talk) 04:47, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We do not have adeaquate sourcing. There is no real coverage of him before his death, and the coverage of his death is not of such a large level that it justifies an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:11, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I forgot to mention there are a few other instances of Miklos getting relatively minor mainstream press coverage in multiple outlets for appearing on a line of beach towels for American Apparel in 2010 and when he appeared in Perfume Genius music video for his song "Hood" in 2012. A number of those can be found via google search. So there is more than just coverage of his suicide (albeit not great), and as I mentioned in my first post, there are assertions he was a notable person in his field. Mainstream coverage on porn stars is usually very superficial in nature, so you can't expect a lengthy write up on his life and career. I'm not sure this AFD will get much more participation after almost three weeks now and little discussion. I suspect most people who've seen it don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. Also Miklos has been deceased for a number of years now, so there are no BLP issues to contend with. I'll go ahead and vote Keep while I'm at it. Not my strongest AFD argument, but I think there's enough reasoning in my arguments to justify my vote. GoldenAgeFan1 (talk) 21:12, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I guess it's subjective, but I don't think references to the subject's commercial interest in a line of beach towels is significant coverage. Ficaia (talk) 14:42, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and/or WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Only WP:SIGCOV appears to be of subject's suicide, which is not a notability criterion in isolation. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 23:00, 30 January 2022 (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.