Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flower's Squirt Shower

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 no consensus. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 06:19, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Flower's Squirt Shower

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

Fails NFILM and the GNG not to mention WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Little more than an commentary-free collection of castlists. Other sourcing and content is trivial at best. "Best Specialty Release – Squirting" is about as likely to be a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking, as required by the pertinent SNG, NFILM, as Generalissimo Francisco Franco is likely to be no longer still dead. Disruptively deprodded without coherent explanation or article improvement by the usual suspect. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by admins since 2006. (talk) 01:03, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Everything seems to well-sourced to me. Adult films nominated, and even winning, AVN Awards strikes me as notable. Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your prize!) 14:33, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Be that as it may, the WP:NFILM standard is higher than a "notable award". It requires winning "a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking". The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by admins since 2006. (talk) 18:51, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 17:07, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Well, it's a niche film series and the awards it won is the highest it is able to achieve. We have the precedence of aggregating the film series of individual movies rather than list each one. See [1]. There are reviews of the individual movies out there whether they be AVN, XCritic, or Rogreviews so people can theoretically add those as descriptions to the individual movies. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:28, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete couldn't find any non-porn sources except Amazon,fails WP:GNGAtlantic306 (talk) 16:49, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Draft and userfy as a compromise because the current article may seem acceptable, it is also still solidly questionable for the applicable notability therefore drafting and userfying for now is acceptable. SwisterTwister talk 05:28, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This article has twelve external links to sales information including six links to hardcore porn images .This is a breach of policies 1,4,5 of WP:ELNO Atlantic306 (talk) 16:37, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Morbidthoughts. A complete list of all awards/nominations for this film series demonstrates that Best Squirting Release/Series are the only award categories it qualifies for. It makes no sense to disregard genre-specific categories and require wins in generic categories when that doesn't exist for porn films/series. Even generic-sounding categories like the XRCO Award for Best Release are genre-specific, since they are only given to what the porn industry calls "feature" films, which refers to a very specific type of plot/acting that excludes the student/teacher, secretary/boss etc. story-lines of Brazzers/Naughty America as well as parodies, which are placed in "Vignette" and "Parody" categories instead. Rebecca1990 (talk) 18:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So your argument is that because it doesn't even "qualify" for any awards that meet NFILM requirements, it's notable so long as it wins anything? That's beyond ridiculoius, especially given the undeniable failure to satisfy the GNG. Even worse, but unsurprising, is that the factual premise of your argument is wrong, and you know it. You say that releases like this, as well as parodies, don't qualify for general awards. But for the last two years, AVN gave its "Movie of the Year" award to parodies. And releases like this, which you acknowledge are in the "vignette" category, are also eligible, and were nominated in prior years. So unless you can explain how "Best Squirting Release" meets the NFILM requirement as "a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking", your argument carries no weight whatever. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 12:36, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - winners + arguments above. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 17:44, 13 February 2016 (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.