Talk:Michael Lucas (porn star)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

Contents 1 External links 2 Edit differences 3 Validity of information 4 Validity of information 5 Request for Comments 5.1 Comment 6 Request to revert version 7 One more reference to go, please 8 Fix link

[edit] External links

The link to "Pornstar Talk" took nearly 10 minutes to download on a DSL connection; please see Web accessibility. The link is to content that includes irrelevant information for this article (the show is not just an interview with Michael Lucas; it is a lengthy talk show that covers additional topics). If there is material that is relevant to the article that hasn't been included; quoting from a transcript of the show and referencing the transcript would be the way to go. (Additionally, use of external links should be limited to a small number—there are ample references. See Wikipedia:External links.)—Chidom ^talk  14:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit differences

• I agree; I was mistaken in using Lucas's blog as a source. However, I feel his model profile at Lucas Entertainment, a commercial company, is a valid resource.
• saying he "fled" to Germany is POV; he moved there
• "narcissim 101" is a POV blog that shouldn't be quoted or referenced
• "proceed at your own risk" falls into the same category
  • Just a note: Lucas's visit to Israel started on August 29 and ends on September 4—how is it possible to report on it in the past tense before it's over?
• what is the problem with the images? Image of DVD cover substituted for unsourced image
• calling the other porn studios "competing" is POV and unverifiable
• if we include the quote from the article about his hustling; we should include the positive review in the Adam Gay Directory for balance, or both should go. The Directory is an industry-recognized review and one of the few sources of information available for film/performer information. I've put the former back in; if it is deleted, so should the other reference.
• identifying his audience at the tea is a quote from the article—why can't it be included?
• as a point of editing, I generally include a space between the hyphens for a heading and the heading text itself; it's not an error, and doesn't affect the outcome of the page; it's a visual difference when editing

—Chidom ^talk  18:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Validity of information

From Wikipedia: Biographies policy:

"The article should document, in a non-partisan manner, what reliable third party sources have published about the subject and, in some circumstances, what the subject may have published about themselves. The writing style should be neutral, factual, and understated, avoiding both a sympathetic point of view and an advocacy journalism point of view."

(emphasis added)

The Michael Lucas biographical information published at Lucas Entertainment's website would fall under this category. It is a valid source of information.—Chidom ^talk  02:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Validity of information

• It is common practice here at Wikipedia to include images of DVD covers for porn stars. It is not an advertisement for the product, but a way to identify the individual. Why is that a problem in this case?

• As to Mr. Lucas's bio, please see the policy excerpt above; and explain why a quote from the actual person regarding his career is inappropriate in this instance. Also, please see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources for additional information about using self-published information. I believe this information falls under that policy.

• The source for the criticism of his trip is a self-identified blog; and is not a valid source for an article. Please again refer to Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources for additional information about using blogs.

• Wikipedia:Verifiability is policy and governs here.

• I again state my opinion that who his audience was at the Tea is relevant; why do you feel it isn't? There is a difference in types of audiences; it is appropriate to document who the audience was, particularly for an address to an organization with which few people are familiar.

We obviously have a difference of opinion ; I have referenced Wikipedia policy in support of my edits. I would like to resolve this amicably; I hope we can do so. Please let me know what the rationale behind your edits is.—Chidom ^talk  18:01, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

To the anon editor who keeps removing this, he quite clearly calls himself Jewish here[1], regarldess of the opinion of Wiki editors on whether he is or not. I haven't seen any of his films (ahem) so I can't comment on the claim the anon editor made about whether or not he is circumcized, but, that's irrelevant and original research. Mad Jack 02:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Comments

Disagreements with regard to the content of this article:

1. The validity of the Model Profile of Michael Lucas at the website at www.lucasentertainment.com as a source.
2. The inclusion of a photo of a DVD cover depicting Michael Lucas.
3. The validity of a blog "Sex, Lies and Videotape: How Myths Are Born", Proceed at Your Own Risk as a source.
4. The use of the word moved vs. fled to describe his leaving Russia and going to Germany. Statement is now changed and sourced.
5. The relevance of specifying the makeup of his audience at the Masters Tea.
6. The validity of "Step Right Up", Narcissism101, www.narcissism101.typepad.com as a source.

[edit] Comment

1. Looks like official company PR material. Acceptable.
2. I'm unclear on the issue here. Suggest bowing to precedent and using it unless someone expresses a particular reason not to.
3. A blog? No.
4. I'm unclear on the issue here. If there's a dispute among legitimate citations, suggest footnoting with references to each version.
5. I'm unclear on the issue here. Audience makeup doesn't seem very relevant. What's the argument for including it?
6. Another blog? No.

Also, regarding Jewish identification, the site referenced looks like it would (marginally) pass WP:V. Durova 22:35, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Elaborating on the above: official company press releases are generally acceptable for Wikipedia. I'd disallow the blogs with the exception of the official blog from Lucas Entertainment (which is essentially a PR release in blog format) and Mr. Lucas's own disclosures on his personal blog. Regarding a third site, that does not self-identify as a blog but that comes from a blog host, the burden of proof according to WP:V rests on the shoulders of whoever wants to include a source. I'll assume that's a disallowable blog unless proven otherwise. I did mention one site as marginal but allowable - it seems to be a minor web publication from a source whose primary business is a dating service rather than journalism. That said, it's been in business for ten years.

I'd allow the DVD image and I now understand the need to specify that the audience at the Master's Tea was a group of students (as opposed to faculty). Regards, Durova 07:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request to revert version

Please revert this article to [2], with the last edits of user 205.188.116.9 at 13:17, September 6, 2006. The subsequent edits were made by an anonymous IP user that refuses to engage in dialog about the inappropriate content and sources that the anonymous user adds to the article.—Chidom ^talk  06:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Done: Technically, this was a meta:The Wrong Version revert, but I agree that the external link wasn't Wikipedia:External links compliant seeing as the link to www.pornstarstalk.com doesn't actually contain an actual interview. --  Netsnipe  ►  09:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] One more reference to go, please

Please remove the last item in the "External links" list, that for "Proceed at Your Own Risk", as per item 3 in the "Request for Comments" above. Thanks.—Chidom ^talk  09:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Done. --  Netsnipe  ►  09:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fix link

In the Live event: section, please replace the text to the left of the pipe in "[[Joe Gage|Joe Gage]]" with "Tim Kincaid" to fix a redirect link: "[[Tim Kincaid|Joe Gage]]". Please keep the non-breaking space to the right of the pipe. Thanks.

This can wait until the page is unprotected; generally, pages protected due to disputes should not be edited. Thanks. JesseW, the juggling janitor 00:03, 13 September 2006 (UTC)