Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnny Sins (2nd nomination)

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:41, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Sins[edit]

[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)

Non-notable porn star recreated after AfD deletion. Still fails WP:PORNBIO with only a scene-related award win. Still fails WP:GNG/WP:BASIC without significant coverage by reliable secondary sources. RS references are about the PornHub publicity stunt he participated in. Other biographical sources are interviews and press releases. • Gene93k (talk) 13:57, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:59, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:00, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:00, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:32, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:33, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:34, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - maybe it does not qualify 100% to meets of WP:PORNBIO but meets of Wikipedia:GNG. He is almost cult in pornography industry, also well known as "bald" from Brazzers, popular even in memes outside the pornographic industry [1] and "he is consistently among the most popular porn searches[9][10][11]" - notable per Wikipedia:Common sense. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 10:58, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Is this article any better than the one which was WP:SNOW-deleted in 2016? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnny Sins. Narky Blert (talk) 12:43, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Yes, after 2016 added one award and many nominations, career on the internet has begun from 2017, added to article other sources (outside the erotic industry) etc. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 13:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: the article has just been updated, Johnny Sins meets of the WP:PORNBIO with individual (no scene) AVN Award. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 10:40, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet our notability requirements for pornographic actors. I do have good news on this front, our entry on Sarah Jackson does not mention the nude model of that name, but 4 other people. Which makes the University of Tennessee attempt to discipline for sexual harassment a student for writing "Sarah Jackson" as the name of his TA as even more ludicrous.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:48, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
for example, what's encyclopedic in this sub-stub: Sarah Jackson (teacher)? You always vote for delete for porn stars, like anti-porn troll, but teacher who nothing significant in the world for you is encyclopedic?!? If no, why you do not vote for deletion for Sarah Jackson (teacher) and you're just still spamming all porn-articles on AfD with your self-acting "Delete"? Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 10:10, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
by the way, the article has just been updated, Johnny Sins meets of the WP:PORNBIO with individual (no scene) AVN Award. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 10:40, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - As the keep above said, he's cult in the industry, performing in over 1000 scenes for Brazzers alone. Also one of the most searched porn stars. Even has international popularity, particularly in Turkey, due to his internet presence. AA (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:03, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - At the least, he meets WP:PORNBIO with his "Favorite Male Porn Star" win at the 34th AVN Awards in 2017. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 09:10, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- That's just wrong. The cited award is an AVN Fan Award, which by consensus fails PORNBIO standards. As the awards ceremony article points out, the award od given out "apart from the actual awards ceremony", demonstrating its relative insignificance.The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk)
  - No, there is no officially consensus. The fact that the same people of meatpuppetry group pushing own point of view does not mean anything. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 12:25, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Hullaballoo Wolfowitz: Then someone should amend the guideline to state "awards in scene-related, ensemble, and fan categories are excluded from consideration" with a link to said consensus in his or her edit summary. Until then, I stand by my !vote. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 05:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Also per Morbidthoughts below. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 05:33, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As the nom accurately points out, the sourcing for this article is quite dire -- the majority of the references are laundry lists of porn award award nominations, which mention the subject's name but otherwise provide no substantive information regarding him. None of his awards meet PORNBIO standards, but are the common-as-dirt industry tinfoil trophies -- scene awards don't count, vendor awards don't count, and AVN Fan Awards have consistently been found to fail PORNBIO (eg, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jayden Jaymes, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hitomi Tanaka (3rd nomination). Otherwise, the claimed notability is based only on 1) a breifly viral video in Turkey, where the coverage gives negligible significant information regarding the subject himself, and 2) a crowdfunding attempt/likely scam to shoot porn in space which included the subject in its planned cast list. The latter is particularly badly sourced, because the costs were greatly exaggerated (it actually costs less than $200,000 to procure a "vomit comet" ride and shoot the necessary footage; the campaign actually "raised" more than enough to do this and cover the other expenses, though no production was made; and 3) it apparently wouldn't have been the first, since a European porn company made a comparable film in 1999 and actually was nominated for a Nebula Award for it [2][3]. Far too crudulous internet press coverage is nowhere near enough to support a BLP. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 21:42, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: a fan-based award (i.e. "Favorite Male Porn Star") does not meet WP:PORNBIO, per long standing consensus, and there's nothing better. Lacks WP:SIGCOV to meet WP:ANYBIO, and none has been presented at this AfD nor available. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:19, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article is almost all trash, but the fact remains that Sins is one of the most prolific performers on the major porn websites. He doesn't qualify for an article under WP:PORNBIO, but I find it hard to believe that reliable sources can't be found that establish his notability under WP:BASIC or WP:GNG. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 22:25, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

After two AfDs, such sources still have not been located... --K.e.coffman (talk) 22:57, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

K.e.coffman, better to delete the article, all porn articles to delete :D Seriously: instead of still voting for removal - look for sources, correct the article. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 12:41, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (talk) 17:41, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In my understanding, WP: NACTOR#2 "Have a large fan base or a significant cult following." It applies to pornographic actors who go beyond the line of anonymity.Guilherme Burn (talk) 11:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I see conflict of interest in various AfDs about pornographic actor. With a demand for notoriety much higher than the average of other biographies. I believe it is interesting a RfC open to the community to re-discuss WP:PORNBIO (a 2007 rule?), in my opinion there should not exist such a specific rule so. When then say "long standing consensus" this consensus is not registered in WP:PORNBIO which does not invalidate the keep vote.Guilherme Burn (talk) 12:15, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I don't quite understand why but the news keeps covering him therefore passing the WP:GNG.[4][5][6][7][8][9] Morbidthoughts (talk) 01:26, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GNG. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:34, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This person is arguably the most notable male porn star ever. Flooded with them hundreds 06:36, 22 September 2018 (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.