Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tawnee Stone 2

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. – Sasquatcht|c 22:53, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tawnee Stone

There are lots of naked people on the internet. The article does not establish why an encyclopedia should care about this particular one. Delete. Gamaliel 19:32, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Maybe Gamaliel has missed all the current controversery (e.g. AN/I, article's talk) surrounding this article, and is not trying to prove a point, but google has 1.6 million hits on "Tawnee Stone" [1] which is certainly notable enough for me. There are WP:NOR, WP:V and privacy issues to be resolved here, but making a blanket statement of not notable is not the way. While we are at it, see also the previous AFD. Dragons flight 19:46, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

• Actually that controversy is what brought the article to my attention. In my opinion this is not a way to avoid the controversy; the controversy is irrelevant since this article does not appear to be encyclopedic. I have read the previous vfd and wish to echo Quale's comment: "Google test is not persuasive for porn. Normal bio criterio would be more persuasive: accomplishments, awards, recognition outside the porn world". That's why I listed it again for vfd. The previous vfd contained many assertions of notability but no citations or proof. Gamaliel 19:53, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

• No, normal bio criteria should not be used because porn identities like this are not real people, they are roles in the same way Han Solo or Judge Dredd is a role. It's a work of fiction and the only verifiable information (and the only information belonging in the article, in my opinion) is that which the marketing/production studio provides. If you want to argue that this particular role is in some tangible way less significant than the bazillions of other minor fictional entities that worm their way into Wikipedia, then alright, that's your choice, but I don't agree. Dragons flight 20:18, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

• "Han Solo (born 29 BBY), a character in the fictional Star Wars universe, is played by actor Harrison Ford", "A film based around the comic strip was released in 1995, starring Sylvester Stallone as Dredd." -- Both quotes from Wikipedia articles on these characters. Anetode 23:33, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
• Fine, but I don't see any evidence that this "role" is notable or encyclopedic either. Gamaliel 20:20, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

• Bleeh, how anyone ever got me to search adult industry news, I'll never know, but here you go. Dragons flight 20:34, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
  • "Well, to begin with, there’s Tawnee Stone, the Lightspeed Girl and Internet superstar who has become the single-girl site model for success since she exploded onto the scene in 2001. Despite four years time and the apparent short attention span of porn surfers, she still owns the company’s number one site." [2]
  • "A by-product of Jones' magic touch has been the emergence of a bona fide Internet star, Tawnee Stone (www.tawneestone.com), a sexy teen and Lightspeed contract player whose site has been a boon to amateur teen traffic." [3]

• I'm not entirely convinced, but I'll withdraw my objections if the article reflects this information. Gamaliel 18:46, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, Why are we starting a *second* AfD on her, when the last one was resolved as a firm keep in July? Careful attention has to be paid to keep the article biographical and unsensational, but she's certainly as famous in her own genre as Meryl Streep or Bob Hope were in theirs. Sherurcij 19:59, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

• If she is really that famous, then it should be no trouble for someone to come up with some sort of substantiation besides google hits, which we all know are manipulated by porn sites. I know the porn industry has its own news sites and publications, so let's see a citation. Gamaliel 20:01, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

You failed to address a single one of my comments, good job. As per "other substantiation", ASU seems to substantiate the facts being bandied about. (Although I do not suggest this information be mentioned in the biography, merely in the AfD since you asked for evidence)

Image:Saris.jpg

250px

Sherurcij 20:29, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I directly addressed your comment about her fame. It is your comments that have failed to address anything relevant, since her true identity is not the matter at hand. Gamaliel 20:40, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

• Comment. Absolutey zero Nexis hits. Doesn't sound very notable to me. Google is an unreliable source. --Lord Voldemort ^{(Dark Mark)} 20:38, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per Sherurcij. If she survived an Afd in July then I consider her notability or otherwise irrelevant a mere two months later. Dlyons493 21:10, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per Dragons flight's research and Sherurcij's argument. DES ^(talk) 21:39, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Keep; notable porn performer of the Internet age. And revert to standard biographical details; there is no reason Wikipedia should redact factual material (birth name, place, etc.) that would be standard in the bio of a scientist or politician. And additionally, keep on the basis of a previous AfD/VfD and no change in circumstances. --MCB 22:56, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Comment I echo this sentiment, her actual name and hometown are fairly basic - mentioning her academia is slightly less basic, the fact she used to waitress at IHOP is no different than trivia about Drew Barrymore working at McDonalds or something. But get rid of the details on her brothers' names and stuff, that starts to toe the line. Sherurcij 23:35, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

• No, there should be no personal information about a real life person in this article. The only known association between the stage name "Tawnee Stone" and the name of a real person is a couple of posting on a couple web forums by people claiming to have gone to high school with her. That is not a verifiable and credible source. Encyclopedias are supposed to be using information that is beyond reproach rather than relying on internet gossip. There are only 32 websites that claim to identify Tawnee Stone's real name and more than half of these are us and mirrors of us. The original research quotient runs very high in any attempt we would make to say who she really is. Dragons flight 23:55, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
  • In any other context, 10+ sources (independent of WP mirrors) confirming a fact would be considered more than enough, in the absence of any contradictory evidence. --MCB 22:59, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Okay, I just went through and counted. Of the 32, there are 4 unique entries that are not obviously derived from us. All of these are posts on internet forums. (Of course, some of those might be based on reading it here as well.) Dragons flight 23:10, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Seems notable enough for mine. We shouldn't have different standards for actresses in various genre films. Capitalistroadster 23:17, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep & keep basic details as per mcb. These are a matter of public record, it's not like Wikipedia is allowing for a Tawnee-Stone-Stalker-Club to be hosted. Anetode 23:37, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Only they aren't a matter of public record because there are no real public records that anyone has located to say what the actress' name is. Dragons flight 23:55, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
    • USC Title 18 Section 2257 Custodian of Records: Lightspeed Media Rob Appgood 14867 N 66th Ave Glendale, AZ 85306 Anetode 00:24, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
      • And you have a copy, do you? Those records are required to be offered to the Attorney General upon request, but they are not public in the sense that you or I would ordinarily be allowed to see them. Dragons flight 00:25, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
        • No I don't. But if verification is your main concern here, you can try to contact Rob Appgood or Tammy Saris. Anetode 09:49, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per Gamaliel . --Vsion 02:45, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Notable celebrity. TheMadBaron 02:50, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Notability WELL established, and Wikipedia is not censored. -- Grev -- Talk 06:56, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Worthless information. CalJW 07:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Certainly in the top 10% notable performers in her field.--Nicodemus75 11:18, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Notability already established on the previous AfD, and I've seen no new information to contest it. Owen× ☎ 11:58, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• keep as per above Roodog2k (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

• Definitely keep. Sorry, but she's definitely notable. We have much less notable pornstars here anyway. Redwolf24 (talk) 06:47, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - just because you think it's worthless doesn't mean everyone does. ··gracefool |☺ 07:44, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, she is definately notable - possibly the most notable in this genre of internet porn. The article should only contain information that is verifiable as with any other Wikipedia article though. Thryduulf 12:42, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

• Keep --R.Koot 18:38, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Advertising and totally nn. Marcus22 19:52, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep she's seem notable, but keep personal information out.
  • —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.132.121.141 (talk • contribs) , the only contribution from that IP address. Thryduulf 10:45, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

This AfD should be scrubbed of personal information once it's completed. Wikipedia is not in the business of investigative journalism, or of "outing" people whose real identities aren't public. What if we made a mistake? The potential risks are too large for something that isn't in our mission anyway. There's no educational value in the personal details of porn actresses, since their personal details have nothing to do with their notability.

Also, has anyone at any point contacted this girl to tell her what happened? She might appreciate a "heads-up" that she's been outed here. Isomorphic 07:01, 27 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.