Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pov Pervert 5
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mr.Z-man (talk | contribs) at 02:23, 8 September 2008 (Closing debate, result was no consensus). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 02:23, 8 September 2008 by Mr.Z-man (talk | contribs) (Closing debate, result was no consensus)
- 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. Mr.Z-man 02:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Pov Pervert 5 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Article is blatantly POV (No pun intended) and consists of weasel words; fails to mention any notability as a porno IRK!Leave me a note or two 01:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Heh, nice pun; on to serous matters though. Delete as per nom. RockManQ (talk) 01:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)Changed to Weak Keep based on vertifable XRCO award win RockManQ (talk) 21:10, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. That XRCO Award is a recognized award in porn and the Best of 2005 win is verifiable.[1] I will check for other coverage, but this film does a critical reception. • Gene93k (talk) 02:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, if we can find sources for the XRCO Award to show that she did indeed win it that would be a pretty darn good reason to keep. RockManQ (talk) 02:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)Thanks for finding that, I didn't notice the source you posted at first. RockManQ (talk) 21:10, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]- I never challenged the accuracy of the XRCO win. I did not mention that because it is still not particularly notable. There are countless pornographic movies produced annually; one award, if none other were mentioned, does not make it notable. IRK!Leave me a note or two 03:00, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I have to recuse myself. FYI I reviewed, nominated, and voted for POV Pervert 5 in the selection process of the XRCO Awards. Out of 5000 new releases, the XRCO gave awards out to seven movies in 2005. Six if you discount best movie series being a movie. Point of comment is, many movies produced, not many get awards. Morbidthoughts (talk) 03:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The XRCO is also not the only award program for adult entertainment. Also, the article is not likely to expand further than having a POV win; because it is a gonzo release, it'll simply be a recount of each scene by scene. My point is that one win, even from a major organization, does not make it notable. This is why I recommended that if you think this is that notable, you or someone else who thinks this article should be kept should create an article for the series as a whole. I've noticed there are some for series, like My Baby Got Back and Britney Rears. IRK!Leave me a note or two 04:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - XRCO win is documented; however my vote is on the weak side as I sincerely doubt this entry will never get above stub level. Tabercil (talk) 12:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Very Weak Keep Borderline notable. I don't think that stubs are a problem though. SpecialK 14:21, 4 September 2008 (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.