Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Felix Vicious

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Nishkid64 18:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Felix Vicious

Felix Vicious (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Does not meet notability criteria in WP:BIO or WP:PORNBIO. Thus, delete. Joe Beaudoin Jr. Think out loud 00:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep (reluctantly). With all due respect to Joe and his work, WP:PORNBIO isn't policy (or even an accepted guideline) yet (keep workin' on it though, Joe). She appears notable enough to have an article, despite her chosen profession.--William Thweatt Talk | Contribs 01:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Very weak keep There are references, but I cannot tell if they are non-trivial.-MsHyde 02:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep. Number of films is over 100 which is sufficient to meet the level for current American actresses per criteria #3 under the "dubious" section. Tabercil 05:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep The 3rd party sources on her seem to indicate notability in her field. --Oakshade 05:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete The sources cited are a promotional site belonging to the performer, and a couple of websites which also appear to promote porn and not to be particularly reliable. Being in a great many porn films does not appear to be equivalent to being in the same number of Hollywood films or broadcast TV shows, since they might be low budget efforts in a motel room with a camcorder, and are in general weak on plot, dialogue, acting, and production values. Wish her well now that she has retired, in her future college career. Inkpaduta 16:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - I'm not convinced of the notability. I agree with User:Inkpaduta about comments above. Philippe Beaudette 18:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Utterly run-of-the-mill non-notable porn star. Meeting the dubious 100-film criterion is easily overmatched by failing every other criterion. Valrith 20:29, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per WP:PORNBIO. Criterion 5 states "There is an original film (not a compilation) named after the performer." According to IMDB, she was in "Kick Ass Chicks 5: Felix Vicious" (which I maintain was snubbed in the 2003 Oscar nominations). So -- uh, yeah. I mean, the girl isn't exactly Katharine Hepburn, but this one seems like it should come down (barely) on the side of inclusion. Seventypercent 03:52, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
    • You mean WP:PORNBIO criterion 7. --Oakshade 04:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
      • Criterion 7, yes. Thanks for the correction! Seventypercent 04:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Felix Vicious has has appeared in dvds that have sold tens if not hundreds of thousands of copies internationally, appeared in internationally distributed magazines (Hustler), and gets 435,000 hits on Google for "Felix Vicious". The article is barely above Stub status so I can't really see how it could indicate or not indicate notability. The standard for notability of porn actors seems unreasonably high to me, as a performer in any other entertainment field with these statistics would be considered notable enough for inclusion.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dissolva (talk • contribs) 01:48, February 10, 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete not notable, no sources to prove it eitherSlideAndSlip 21:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
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.