no consensus, 2 September 2014 (UTC), see discussion.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arizona, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Arizona on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArizonaWikipedia:WikiProject ArizonaTemplate:WikiProject ArizonaArizona articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
Latest comment: 9 years ago11 comments6 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Oppose by longstanding article stability and consensus across category, and WP:RECOGNIZABILITY. In the case of Hillary Scotts both have imdb entries, though the singer has evidently only acted in music videos, but more importantly all the same reliable sources don't describe "the pornstar Jane Doe" as "the actress Jane Doe", our dabs and categories are supposed to be recognizable and consistent with common WP:RS usage. The nom should provide evidence that "the actress FOO" is used more often than "the pornstar FOO" and "the pornographic actress FOO" in Google Books. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:35, 24 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Oppose, pornography can rightfully be given its own respect as a successful area of media but there is no reason to confuse this popular form of performance with acting. Suggest April O'Neil (adult entertainer). The genre centres on performance in the context sex acts. GregKaye 11:04, 24 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
If you look at April O'Neil's IMDB page, it appears that she has done a lot of porn spoofs, including Dr. Who, The Godfather, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Bridesmaids, Tron, Star Trek: The Next Generation, X-Files, Saved by the Bell, etc. While I haven't seen any of these, and have no desire to, I assume that they would include some actual acting in addition to the performance of sex acts. While the quality of the acting might not be up to par, there are lots of bad actors that are notable enough for Wikipedia articles. That said, I wouldn't oppose a mass retitling of (pornographic actress) and (pornographic actor) titles to (adult entertainer), which seems to be the more accepted term. --Ahecht (TALK PAGE) 14:52, 25 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
The reading of WP:CONCISE in the nomination, and other pornstar biography RMs current is novel. Note that for example Exhalation (story) redirects to Exhalation (short story) and so on. WP:CONCISE refers to the title not the dab, and we do not clip (dabs) simply to make them short when that is the category. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:57, 24 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Support.WP:CONCISE actually argues in favor of using "actress", not against it. And In ictu oculi, you really need to stop moving the article titles while the discussions are ongoing. Erpertblah, blah, blah... 02:18, 25 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Erpert, you need to stop moving the article titles without discussion - please use the RM mechanism. And the relevant one of the 5 WP:CRITERIA is WP:PRECISE - but look at the other 4. In ictu oculi (talk)
Support per the very first line of WP:CONCISE since anyone even vaguely familiar with the subject would know that she is a pornographic actress. Thus "actress" is a suitable and concise disambiguator. Dismas|(talk) 22:12, 25 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:April O'Neil which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 years ago18 comments10 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: not moved. Andrewa (talk) 15:26, 6 May 2015 (UTC)Reply
looking at the specific page: http://heyitsapril.tumblr.com/about we read: "I’m a big Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles fan. (good), "I’m an even bigger Doctor Who Fan (better), "I perform in pornographic movies and pose naked for photos (fine), "I am bisexual (considerate), "I met Kylee Reese at a party and we talked about what it was like to be in porn. She told me I could start shooting scenes with only girls to see how I liked it. I gave it a try and absolutely loved it. (its what she does).
A Rolling Stone article describes (the lovely): "April O'Neil" "...a unique porn actress ... Lots of geeks fantasize about porn stars; O'Neil, however, may be one of the few triple-X performers they'd actually run into...". I've had enough but there's plenty more references to check. Her article is in Category:American female pornographic film actors with many other entries which either have or arguably should have similar disambiguations as those proposed. GregKaye 18:40, 28 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Support per sources. No source describes this bio as "an actress" "the actress April O'Neil". The move was in total disregard of normal WP:CRITERIA. The fact that (actor) is shorter than (pornographic actor) also would make (speed skater) (sport shooter) (landscape architect) and many other dabs invalid, but dabs don't have to be short they need to be recognizable and based on reliable sources not WP:OR. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:42, 28 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Exactly. IMO, this area of Wikipedia, and no pun was intended, has gone fucking mad. Sure, its fine to present views on any interpreted ethical issue regarding some issue of representation and I would encourage this to happen. However, in cases that I have seen, these lively vivacious people are more than willing and I would WP:CRYSTAL happy to describe themselves as pornstars. It may always be possible that some Wikipedia editors may have more of an issue with pornography than the stars themselves. I think that there an argument might be fairly presented that this is a contentious WP:LABEL which, if correct, would be fine. I have been wrestling with similar issues at Hillary Rodham Clinton. In this case it may be argued that the only reason that "Hillary Diane Rodham" presents herself as "Hillary Clinton" is because of the various political pressures of US prejudice and bias and, if there is evidence for this, then a case for an application of WP:IAR or some such might reasonably be made.
However, I personally think that moves to ".. (actress)" maybe counter productive as, at least by one argument, we may be subliminally saying that it is in some way colluding with the prejudice that it insulting to say that someone is a porn star.
WP:TITLECHANGES currently states: "In discussing the appropriate title of an article, remember that the choice of title is not dependent on whether a name is "right" in a moral or political sense." To me, this is a bit hard line especially when we consider that, for instance, various news groups have specialist staff dealing with ethics and maybe the extremity of this policy can be brought into question. None-the-less, we need to aim for encyclopedic titles that accurately describe their subjects. Discussions like the previous RM have given, I think, scant regard to the identity, lifestyle and persona of the subject. GregKaye 03:06, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Oppose, she's an actress. I don't think Wikipedia adds "Comedy actress", "Advertising actress", etc., in its listings for other actresses, all of whom act for money. As I've mentioned before about others in these discussions, these people are not filmed in public, or in a reality show setting. They have a script, a director, a lighting person, a makeup person, and then some. Full disclosure: I've never heard of her, or almost all of these type of professional actors, so maybe her acting isn't up to the standards of some critics. But as far as I know she's an actress with all the professional credit and hard work (no pun unintended) involved. (EDIT: I see that this was just decided and closed a month ago. She's hardly had time to change the sheets before her acting is under scrutiny again. Leave April alone - especially as we are about to enter May, some puns untended). Randy Kryn 11:20, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
I'm not making any judgement on acting talent here. GregKaye 12:00, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Leave Brittany alone! (oh, wait, wrong Brittany. Sorry.) Randy Kryn 12:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Randy Kryn lol, I would guess that for a very great many people, should they be so very fortunate to have any such chance, they would find it very, very difficult to leave someone like a willing Brittany Andrews alone! Brittney describes herself as a "Playboy Model, Award Winning Indie Film Producer and Two Time Hall of Fame Adult SuperStar" if that is good enough for her then its good enough for me. GregKaye 17:07, 1 May 2015 (UTC)Reply
With these new listings maybe Wikipedia can put this issue to bed (pun recommended) Randy Kryn 12:58, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Oppose. Unnecessary disambiguation. Unless there's another article for an actress with the same name, there's no need for additional disambiguation on articles for pornographic film actresses. Fortdj33 (talk) 12:57, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Oppose. She is an actress, so "actress" is sufficient. Incidentally, I see accusations in all of these move requests that people are voting because they are "for" or "against" pornography. I have no doubt that every Wikipedia editor has an opinion, but I see a diversity of such opinions (and a diversity of creative accusations) on both sides of this general naming debate. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 14:37, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Oppose - Albeit this is a stage name, but this article refers to a real person, not a fictional character, so care needs to be taken to respect the BLP issues involved. That said, this imposes a double standard. As has been mentioned before, we don't label or disambiguate articles for mainstream actors/actresses based on the predominance of roles they take on, why should this genre be any different? --Scalhotrod(Talk) ☮ღ☺ 15:48, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Oppose: We just settled this -- like less than a month ago. This seems like WP:SHOPPING to me. If you didn't like the previous close, by all means take it to WP:Move review, but this is just silly. --Ahecht (TALK PAGE) 16:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Comment Who, apart from the people at Wikipedia predominantly describe her as an actress? Who? Where are they? GregKaye 20:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Well, for starters, you did with the Rolling Stone article that calls her a porn actress. It's no different that Variety making a comment about a comedic actress or an action star. In this case O'Neill just happens to do porn, but she's still an actress. --Scalhotrod(Talk) ☮ღ☺ 10:10, 30 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
User:Scalhotrod please answer User:GregKaye's question: Who, apart from the people at Wikipedia predominantly describe her as "an actress"? "the actress April O'Neil" "April O'Neil the actress" without adding "porn" "adult" or "pornographic". Who? Where are they? In ictu oculi (talk) 15:11, 1 May 2015 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
