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. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:35, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joey Mills (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non notable adult movie actor who doesn’t satisfy WP:NACTOR, or WP:ANYBIO. A before search turns up self published and user generated sources, which we don’t consider to be reliable. I believe this is way WP:TOOSOON as his career is still relatively young. Furthermore WP:GNG & WP:BASIC aren’t satisfied either. Celestina007 (talk) 17:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 17:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 17:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 17:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 17:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I find it relevant and still in development, the actor has been in his professional career for years, I think that if he needs to improve, but we cannot discriminate against him because he is American, in addition, the actor is created in Polish and Spanish. Greetings to all, I hope you take my recommendations. If we talk about relevance, let's look at this entry from Thomas Petrou American internet celebrity and entrepreneur, known for his TikTok and YouTube channels.--Secretsgenius (talk) 17:53, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I thought there would at least be some coverage, but per a BEFORE I couldn’t find any outside of StraightUpGayPorn, which I seriously doubt is an RS. —Kbabej (talk) 21:15, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:33, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. He got a splash of gay press coverage for a tweet he sent about performer pay. It's 1E at best and not very deep. Aside from awards rosters and other trivial mentions, I'm not finding other independent RS coverage. • Gene93k (talk) 21:41, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• keep keep and remove this item without coverage, Guillermo Rodríguez Melgarejo and Richard Holzer. Secretsgenius (talk) 22:45, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is your “keep” rationale, Secretgenius? It would help your position if you posited an argument. I also don’t see how Holzer and Melgarejol are related to this AfD. —Kbabej (talk) 23:35, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• What about article x? comes under arguments to avoid at AfD. The Richard Holzer article already cites reliable source coverage. Coverage for Guillermo Rodríguez Melgarejo is easy enough to find, typical for WP:CLERGY situations. Reliable coverage for Joey Mills is very thin however. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete a non-notable pornographic performer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:34, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Stay I am very curious that some Wikipedians believe that actors and pornos actresses see in this article without relevance when it is exactly this that makes me believe then that there is GayVN Awards, no intention in any way to root out the portal for pornography and homosexuality in all Wikipedias. Secretsgenius (talk) 06:44, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Striking duplicate keep/stay !vote. Winning a porn award, straight or gay, is no longer enough to establish notability absent non-trivial support from good quality references. Since PORNBIO was deprecated in 2019, AVN and GayVN Award winners alike have been removed from Wikipedia. In fact, a few gay performers have been saved at AfD by reliable gay media not shunning porn like mainstream press sources. Joey Mills gets some RS coverage, but not enough yet. • Gene93k (talk) 07:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC

• commentary Because it will be that I read a lot of homophobia on this board, or is it that they are managing it at will, look at the pornography as well as the gay artists are not simply notorious, the community is giving the best of each one, please instruct yourself before giving your opinion. On the other hand you mention that the winners of the AVN and GayVN awards have been eliminated from Wikipedia, when that is not the case there I am reading them on enwiki. Secretsgenius (talk) 15:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @Secretsgenius: Asserting homophobia or other bad intent among Wikipedia editors doesn't make it so. AfD debates are preserved. The pornography WikiProject maintains a list of deletion debates. Among these debates, can you point out where the editors argued from an anti-LGBT bias? As for AVN versus GayVN, my rough count from article histories since 2019 gives about 60 AVN Award and about 30 GayVN Award winners deleted at AfD. • Gene93k (talk) 23:07, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• As for my statement about press coverage, please note the keep rationale at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armond Rizzo. Rizzo won the same GayVN Award as Mills, but Rizzo was kept due to his coverage by Out magazine and PinkNews. Another recent example is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Payne (actor), where Payne was kept due to reliable sources like The Advocate attesting to his notability. At the same time, mainstream straight press tends to shun porn altogether, an issue that Wikipedia has noted for almost 20 years. • Gene93k (talk) 23:07, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @Gene93k:, @Celestina007:, @Kbabej: You shouldn't be thinking about deleting the license on gay porn because I know well that on Wikipedia in Polish, Italian, Spanish, Czech, among other languages, the pages have not given much trouble, and the notoriety of Joey Mills investigated and discovered that Wikidata It houses very relevant and true data about the actor so I don't like the story that the boy is nobody ok. I put back examples where there are articles on Wikipedia in English without any kind of media coverage, rather they carry promotional references and I don't see anyone fighting to eliminate those entries and ask for more accreditation Example: KREEPA. Secretsgenius (talk) 23:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The sources are far too poor (other than Out, but that is just mentions) to justify keeping the article. I've argued for several gay porn articles to be kept, but there needed to be some decent sourcing, at the very least. For now, there isn't any. If Mills gets some better coverage (which is possible, especially since he's still an active performer) the article can be recreated. GoldenAgeFan1 (talk) 18:37, 12 February 2021 (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.