Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J. X. Williams

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. J. X. Williams (pseudonym) will be moved to this name. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 14:37, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

J. X. Williams[edit]

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

Fixing botched nomination (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talk:J. X. Williams). Original rationale is as follows:

This is a pseudonym used by porn writers in the 1960s. The current article has repeatedly be re-written to conform to a art project one Noel Lawrence created, whereby he recut old films and gave lectures claiming they were the work of this fictional character. See refs on talk page. The content of this seems to be part of this "art project", persistently recreated. Actual subject of dubious notability. T L Miles (talk) 21:01, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am neutral. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:31, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:10, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I agree with T L Miles. This is a pseudonym used by porn writers. Jrcrin001 (talk) 06:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Thought we dealt with this messy article last June, specially as many sources indicate that the content of the article has become about later work of Noel Lawrence when Lawrence decided to adopt this pseudonym for his own,[1] and now less about the pseudonym itself. No matter who uses it as a pseudonym (similar to Allen Smithee), it does not lack for significant coverage[2][3]... and a quick look finds such as a rather inciteful article in The New York Times: "Wrapped in an Enigma, Hidden in a Film Archive" This article might be be about the pseudonym and all who used it, or it might be about Noel Lawrence and HIS projects both when using the pseudonym and when not. As Lawrence does not own the more widely used pseudonym, the current article gives far too much weight to he alone. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:01, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep The article text should be razed to the ground, but I think a note saying, well, "This is a pseudonym used by porn writers in the 1960s", along with a list of eventual notable writers who used it and of those films who credited them should be kept. I agree that the article in its present form is a hoax--of all sources, one is a (real) book published by a fringe French publisher, quoted over ten times, the other two were fake, and I have removed them. complainer (talk) 08:53, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If the result of this review is keep, I am going to raze the text to the ground and replace it with a note saying, "This is a pseudonym used by porn writers in the 1960s"; I hope none of you will think of this as vandalism, or as gaming the AfD system (I did, after all, vote to keep it). complainer (talk) 19:00, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- The page J. X. Williams (pseudonym) exists for all non-hoax purposes. Subcelestial (talk) 22:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and move J. X. Williams (pseudonym) to J. X. Williams. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:45, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and move J. X. Williams (pseudonym) to J. X. Williams. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 03:06, 11 August 2012 (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.