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. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:30, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CAM4[edit]

CAM4 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Websites/companies/businesses should have significant coverage to be notable, fails WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:NWEB. Störm (talk) 23:18, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I couldn't think why I had been pinged on this but realised that I had created it. Don't care if deleted or not but if it is restore it to this. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 03:30, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: does not meet WP:NORG / WP:NWEB. --K.e.coffman (talk) 00:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - It's been the subject of criticism in academic journals and conferences. [1][2][3][4] Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:46, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per above sources - Meets GNG. –Dave | Davey2010^Talk 22:13, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: The subject of this article does not seem have impacted the world around in way that needs coverage independent of a broader topic. The sources that my esteemed colleague, User:Morbidthoughts, introduced above indeed mention this subject in passing, but they warrant an article on the broader topic (i.e. Porn 2.0), not on CAM4. In the grand scheme of things, CAM4 is just another run-of-the-mill instance. Passing mentions do not make notability. flowing dreams (talk page) 07:31, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Does notability really require worldwide impact? Also those articles are not passing mentions if you run a translator through them. Yes, it could have been any site that the criticism could have focused on but it was that site. Morbidthoughts (talk) 08:52, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While the phrase "world around them" has the word "world" in it, it is the opposite of "worldwide". The modifier "around them" restricts the phrase.

As for notability, it is a guideline and must be treated with common sense. Imagine this: A western man shook the hand of the Supreme Leader of North Korea. 52 different newspapers wrote about it. Certainly, this man is different from one hundred others who shook the hand of the Supreme Leader of North Korea, but does this man need an article of his own that details his whole life? No. These 52 articles probably mention nothing beyond that single moment of the man's life. Maybe even mentioning him in the article about that certain leader of North Korea does not have due weight. Likewise, these articles are talking about a phenomenon. You have the material. But ask yourself: What can you make with that material? It is important too.

To answer that, let's look at this sample phrase from "Centenas de pessoas online", mas nem tantas: a produção da diferença na pornografia live streaming do cam4.com:

Essedesejo por construir uma relação de intimidadepode justificar, ao menos em parte, a ausência das mulheres negras nessa modalidade de pornografia ao mesmo tempo em que explica o fato de comporem a maioria em outros mercados do sexo: tradicionalmente, elas têm estado fora dos sistemas de parentesco. Carby (1987) explana que enquanto as mulheres brancas foram constituídas como mulheres em sua potencialidade de serem esposas ede serem o canal para a perpetuação do nome do pai –isto é, em sua potencialidade de serem mulheres–, as negras foram constituídas como animais, sem direitos e sexualizadas. No Brasil, Claudete Alves (2010) e Ana Cláudia Lemos Pacheco (2013) têm denunciadoo que elas chamam de solidão da mulher negra, isto é,a forma como as mulheres negras sofrem um tipo de objetificação peculiar que as coloca fora das gramáticas da conjugalidade e do romance e que as mantem no lugar da “outra” e da “disponível sexualmente”. Assim, a mulher com a qual o homem heterossexual quer construir um tipo de intimidade, cuja vida ele quer conhecer para além da sexualidade, cujo prazer importa... essa não é a mulher negra, mas a branca, ainda que o campo seja o da pornografia.

Things like this are a phenomenon. They have been around since mankind has been around. It has nothing specifically to do with CAM4. flowing dreams (talk page) 11:03, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Per Morbidthoughts.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 13:38, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or merge somewhere. Hyperbolick (talk) 13:18, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per Flowing Dreams. Rockphed (talk) 13:19, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The article has gained several notable citations since this discussion began, including industry awards in which it beat or was nominated against contemporaries that have entries that aren't deemed non-notable – such as BongaCams, CamSoda and Chaturbate. Rocklandderek 14:50, 10 September 2019 (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.