Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armond Rizzo

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. Geschichte (talk) 17:08, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Armond Rizzo[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)

The notability criteria for porn actors is WP:GNG or WP:ENT as such subject fails to qualify as they lack in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources. Almost all all awards won by subject are all in house awards hence also doesn’t satisfy WP:ANYBIO. A review of all the ref bombing & a before search doesn’t show subject being notable. Celestina007 (talk) 21:20, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 21:20, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 21:20, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 21:20, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 21:20, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Celestina007, how does an "in-house" award differ from any other award? Benmite (talk) 21:46, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Benmite, As you are the article creator of course I’d be more than willing to explain, on adult movie actors, awards such as “Best gay sex scene” “Best lesbian scene” & the lot are not notable awards. It’s akin to receiving a Domino Pizza staff of the year it doesn’t make the recipient automatically notable. Since PORNBIO has been deprecated, a biographical article on an adult movie actor is to be retained on Wikipedia if they satisfy WP:ENT &/ WP:GNG of which a before search on the article's subject turns up nothing substantial. Celestina007 (talk) 21:59, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007, can you point me to where on here that it was determined that awards for porn scenes were non-notable? The only other type of award I can think of for porn would be awards on an individual basis, which he has been nominated for and won several times. Benmite (talk) 22:22, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Obviously I'm going to say "keep", since I created the article, but I have my reasons. For starters, I'm not sure where your assessment of these sources being unreliable comes from, since none of them have been deprecated or even deemed generally unreliable in the list of perennial sources. Plenty of the sources included are long-standing LGBTQIA-focused publications, including Out and DNA, who identify Rizzo as a significant figure in the modern gay porn industry, as well as Instinct and PinkNews. There are definitely less reliable sources throughout, but those can be removed without the entire article being removed in the process (in other words, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.) Not only that, but he has been among the three most searched-for gay porn actors in the world on Pornhub for the past two years, and, as you pointed out, has been nominated for and won several awards for his work as a performer. Benmite (talk) 22:14, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please read my comments before replying, I never mentioned source analysis anywhere, all I said is awards such as “best gay scene” & the lot are no longer considered reliable & for porn actors, they have to satisfy either WP:GNG or WP:ENT of which the subject of your article fails to satisfy either. Look at WP:PORNBIO & you’d observe it redirects to WP:ENT because PORNBIO is no longer used. Please read WP:INDENT also. A before search only redirects me to his porn scenes if you have three reliable sources that proves subject of article is notable please bring them forward. It used to be WP:PORNBIO that validated such awards like ”best gay seen” but unfortunately it is no longer in use & porn actors are now subject to WP:ENT or WP:GNG. Celestina007 (talk) 22:33, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You said: "...such subject fails to qualify as they lack in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources". This inherently involves source analysis, since none of these sources outside of PinkNews have been discussed enough to end up on the perennial sources list, but PinkNews has been confirmed as reliable. I provided you with four separate sources which could reasonably be considered reliable with regards to LGBTQIA subjects, all of which have Wikipedia articles of their own, used in the article, two of which specifically refer to Rizzo as being an especially important figure in modern gay pornography. He has also appeared in Paper and Logo News as well. You can find these in the article because they are cited in the article. You also didn't respond to any of the other points I made, nor did you explain how awards for pornography are akin to winning a "Domino's Pizza Staff of the Year Award". Those awards are clearly very different because these pornography awards are national or international awards, all of which have articles on Wikipedia as they are the most prominent awards in the industry in which Rizzo works, meaning that WP:ANYBIO is met. There are no articles for the 17th Annual Podunk Domino's Pizza Awards because those apply to a single business in a single town, and they are not industry-wide. Benmite (talk) 23:13, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Celestina007 Benmite (talk) 23:13, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Benmite, I think Nick Moyes said it best, go to the Teahouse & read the section titled AVN. Perhaps that would enlighten you better. Furthermore, don’t just say they appeared on Pink Paper magazine or Logo News, you need to actually provide the sources so we could see if they are reliable sources with editorial oversight & reputation for fact checking & as I have said almost innumerable times now, awards such as “best gay scene” aren’t notable anymore & porn movie actors are now tested under either WP:ENT or WP:GNG of which a before search like I have said over & again only leads me to porn websites. Do not forget to read WP:COI as well. Celestina007 (talk) 23:26, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007, can you please provide a link to the Teahouse discussion on AVN? Furthermore, like I already said, the sources appear within the article itself. You can find them if you press "CTRL+F" and type in the name of the publication. If you really need me to type them all out, I can, but they appear right within the article. Benmite (talk) 23:38, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007, another thing: The reason that you are only finding porn videos when you search up a porn star is because that is usually what Google shows you when you look up any porn star, regardless of their notoriety. Take Asa Akira for example. She is certainly notable on her own as a porn star, but when you look her up almost every result is of her porn. The same happens when you look up other porn stars, such as Abella Danger (see here) or Adriana Chechik (see here). That's just how Google works. Benmite (talk) 23:51, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at the sources in the aforementioned articles you just provided & take a look at the type of sources used in this article, for example you tried to say this Logo News was a reliable source. Did you actually read WP:RS. Celestina007 (talk) 23:56, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007, again, you are not actually providing an explanation for any of this. What exactly makes Logo News an unreliable source? I did read WP:RS. The article from Logo News is not self-published, it's not user-generated, and it's not sponsored. I really need you to start being more specific. Benmite (talk) 00:20, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Benmite, Please don’t WP:BLUDGEON the process, it’s an unreliable source because they do not possess a reputation for fact checking. Again, if you read WP:RS you won’t be asking me that question. Celestina007 (talk) 00:24, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Logo News is generally reliable and certainly a valid source for non-exceptional claims. NewNowNext is the company’s news division. Glee^anon 09:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've not yet found the time to wade through all 29 citations here. @Benmite: the thread Celestina007 referred to that I made at the Teahouse can be found here. You simply cannot defend notability by saying that Google smothers good sources with lots of links to porn video pages!" Go find the sources if you want to assert someone's notability, and don't hide behind your feeling that they're there, but hidden. Try Google News, or Google Books, for example, where you might find they have (or haven't) been written about in detail and in depth by independent reliable sources. Using insider websites as WP:RS is akin to using press releases and business magazine articles used to promote a manufacturer of earthenware drainage pipes. There may be lots of them out there, but these self-promoting, pat-on-the-back news stories and pseudo-award pages like " sluice and drainpipe manufacturer of the year" are simply not sufficient to show that one particular maker of drainpipes is 'Notable'. Same applies here. So, to save everyone the trouble of wading through your multitude of insider citations, please just link to just the three topmost ones which you feel clearly demonstrates this person's notability per WP:ENT or WP:NBIO. And avoid the WP:BLUDGEON, please. (Note that I have removed the CSD template as it was quite inappropriately placed by the same editor who previously AFD-ed this page). Nick Moyes (talk) 15:44, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the thread? I’m not hiding behind anything. I listed each of the sources which I thought qualified as reliable earlier, all of which appear in the article and are independent. You don't have to sift through all 29 to find them, you can just use CTRL+F, but since no one seems to want to do that, here: Out (article; "One of the night’s big winners was Armond Rizzo, a massively popular gay porn actor..."), DNA (article), PinkNews (article; a confirmed RS), Paper (article; not an LGBT-focused or porn-focused publication, therefore not an "insider" source), Instinct (article), and Logo News (article). Celestina007 claimed that a search of Armond Rizzo's name only yielded porn videos, which was used as a rationale for deletion, to which I replied that that is the case with virtually any porn star, which is true. A before search for most porn stars on the main Google page, regardless of notoriety, would yield similar results, as I illustrated earlier. Also, if the issue is that these publications are not scholarly or peer-reviewed, then I will remind you that, as per WP:RSE, articles on popular culture, while still requiring reliable sourcing, "due to the subject matter...may not be discussed in the same academic contexts as science, law, philosophy and so on." I also see nothing about so-called "insider" sources on WP:RS. It's like saying that Pitchfork shouldn't be considered a reliable source for music articles because all of their articles are focused on music. Just because most of the articles used are from publications with a focus on queer culture doesn't mean that they are in any way less reliable, especially considering PinkNews is a confirmed RS. Benmite (talk) 20:56, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Nick Moyes Benmite (talk) 22:09, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:42, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:43, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Lots of chaff here, but this performer may scrape by WP:BASIC with the Out and Pink News coverage. Porn awards count for little without independent RS acknowledgemnt, but he seems to get it. Holding off on a !vote for a closer look. There is lots of ref bombing to sort through. • Gene93k (talk) 21:53, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep undoubtedly meets GNG/BASIC, has numerous mentions in mainstream LGBTQ publications which is somewhat rare for porn stars, and one of few paths to notability besides legal problems.
@Benmite:, you need to trust the process a bit more, use the article’s talk page (lightly) to suggest edits/corrections/sources. The awards BTW, are not meaningless as they represent significant recognition in the industry, like almost every industry award, hello Emmy’s and Oscars.
Celestina007, he has a point about finding sources, google news, for instance, filters not only anything about gay porn but also mainstream LGBTQ news sites. So finding sources for gay porn takes detective work. Glee^anon 09:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator, lacks indepth coverage in reliable, secondary independent sources. We have decided to stop using industry specific publications that exist to drive hits not to provide actual reliable coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:16, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- He is in reliable secondary sources, and mainstream publications do write about the gay porn awards:
  - Parente, Luca (2020-01-29). "L'attore porno Armond Rizzo rivela: «I bottom sono pagati meno dei top»". NEG Zone (in Italian). Retrieved 2020-10-12.
  - "Gay Porn Star Demands Bottoms Get Paid Equal to Tops". PAPER. 2020-01-31. Retrieved 2020-10-12.
  - Newsdesk. "Here's who came TOP in the European Gay Porn Awards". www.thegayuk.com. Retrieved 2020-10-12.
  - "Sind Bottoms weniger wert? - Porno-Star Armond Rizzo deckt auf". www.schwulissimo.de (in German). Retrieved 2020-10-12.
  - dice, Juan (2017-07-04). "Los actores porno gay más buscados en lo que llevamos de 2017". Revista Zero (in Spanish). Retrieved 2020-10-12.
  - "Here's Who Won the 'Oscars of Gay Porn' for 2020". www.out.com. 2020-01-21. Retrieved 2020-10-12.
  - "Voici le palmarès des "Golden Globes" du porno gay". TÊTU (in French). 2019-05-27. Retrieved 2020-10-12.
  - "Voici le palmarès des "Golden Globes" du porno gay". TÊTU (in French). 2019-05-27. Retrieved 2020-10-12.
  - "Find Out Which of Your Favorite Gay Adult Performers Grabbed a 2019 Grabby Award: VIDEO". Towleroad Gay News. 2019-05-28. Retrieved 2020-10-12.
- There’s more but these should help satisfy GNG, and note in at least four languages from as many countries. Glee^anon 17:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Gleeanon409's lists of award coverage in RS and Benmite's list of coverage regarding the subject's thoughts on an industry issue seems more than enough to satisfy GNG. Benmite reports one description of Rizzo, from the magazine Out, above. The magazine Paper additionally describes him: as an established, award-winning performer. Seems enough RS deem his awards noteworthy, and enough deem him, specifically, noteworthy. --Pinchme123 (talk) 19:09, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Would benefit from.source analysis of those sources brought in late to the discussion

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 15:15, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep. Per the sources provided by other user to keep, my suggestion is keep with maintenance tags. (F5pillar---/ ^{'Messager🖋📩}) 15:24, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There's a point where nitpicking over every single source just encourages people to add more low-quality sources. This is counter-productive. There are plenty. — Toughpigs (talk) 16:13, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the above sources establish notability. W 42 19:21, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The coverage in Out and PinkNews (since the latter made it onto WP:RSP) are enough. Modussiccandi (talk) 15:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per the research done by Gleeanon409, above. Also, per "Rizzo — as an established, award-winning performer". Right cite (talk) 19:53, 21 October 2020 (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.