Talk:August Ames

Shouldn't we mention that cyber bullying caused her death?

It is quite conclusive in the media that she was subjected to horrendous cyber bullying immediately prior to her death, and she committed suicide as a direct result of being bullied. One person in particular has been named as causing her the most distress. I would have thought that policy would have concluded that this should be in the article, as it does not hurt her. A similar case relating to Charlotte Dawson, who was similarly bullied to death, does mention that this is how she died. Shouldn't we treat this case in the same way? Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 06:12, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

I have been bold and added what I think should be included in the article. Please feel free to amend. Per what is in the Charlotte Dawson article, I think it is appropriate. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 06:20, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

I added the cyberbully victim category, because it certainly is documented. — Wyliepedia 07:19, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Opposed - I've read many of the articles and none of them conclusively prove that the cyber bullying was the actual cause/trigger of her suicide. It seems all circumstantial. August has revealed that she's had a troubled childhood, had a history with depression and bipolar disorder. The fact that she got depressed again around the same time as the cyber bullying started is purely coincidental and alot of media outlets are insinuating she committed suicide solely because of the cyber bullying. It should be noted that the media outlets are the ones claiming she took her life because of online bullying because right now, there is no 100% confirmation that her suicide was solely driven because of online bullying. Journalists are connecting dots and jumping to conclusions. For all we know, her suicide was triggered by depression due to traumatic childhood memories (she was molested by her grandfather & her own dad didn't believe her after all) and likely had nothing to do with the gay backlash. Armegon (talk) 00:51, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Absolutely laughable. There are Tweets that prove it was bullying. Some people didn't mention it but that was clearly the cause. It is disrespectful not to mention it. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 04:33, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Wrong. If it was the cause then we should have a source that undisputedly confirms it without question, but so far, all we have are articles with people connecting dots rather than giving concrete evidence. It's laughable to assume that online bullying was the direct cause of her death just because some people say it was, people without undeniable proof, mind you. Remember, Ames confirmed that she had a history of depression and bipolar disorder way before the online bullying. If anything, it would be even more disrespectful to attribute her death to something that may not even have been related. It should be noted in the article that her colleagues and media outlets believe her suicide was attributed to online bullying rather than the direct cause. Remember, no one has found any concrete evidence that undeniably proves her suicide was because of online bullying, people are just assuming it was because all of this hit coincidentally at the same time. Armegon (talk) 22:39, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not saying we should remove the connection outright but we should make it clear that the family, colleagues, and media outlets believe or are connecting her suicide with the online bullying, because like I've stressed before, there is absolutely no concrete proof or even a suicide note undisputedly proving that Ames died because of online bullying. It may have been something else. Armegon (talk) 04:04, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

• Police found a letter in her car. 72.184.23.194 (talk) 05:36, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Do we have a source for this? Armegon (talk) 08:58, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

To suggest that someone who was subjected to cyberbullying of this magnitude, including multiple instances of being told to kill herself, in an explicit way, why and how, and who ended up killing herself minutes later, after saying something that many took to hint she was about to, is somehow unrelated is absurd. Yes, depressed people do kill themselves. But people who are subjected to horrendous cyberbullying do it regardless of being depressed. Depression didn't kill her - bullying did. To suggest that she would have killed herself anyway and that these people trying to convince her to do it are unrelated is criminally negligible and is ignorant of the facts of the case. You are essentially saying that she deserved to die for saying that she didn't want to have sex with someone for fear she might get AIDS. Considering that virtually every newspaper is saying she was bullied to death, it is absurd that Wikipedia is even considering covering this up. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 21:07, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

What's absurd is to suggest that someone who was criticized for making Tweets with homophobic rhetoric was "cyberbullied" into committing suicide while ignoring that person having a history of depression and mental illness, getting molested by her grandfather and being called a liar by her family when she told them, while having the audacity to state for a fact that depression didn't kill her knowing her traumatic life story. She wasn't cyberbullied at all most of the people who criticized her did so solely because of the Tweets she chose to put out to the public the large majority of responses were simply debating her point, the fact that the people screaming "cyberbullying" (most of whom are Alt Right homophobes with an agenda) can only point to that same single Tweet from some random guy (who was ironically cyberbullied himself by the same people crying that August was cyberbullied) which August likely didn't even see proves she wasn't cyberbullied since no one else sent her Tweets like that. Stop blatantly lying that multiple people told her to kill herself as if she got a wave of Tweets like that when it was one guy who said it sarcastically, and she didn't kill herself minutes later she killed herself the next day with her and her friends saying before and after her death that she had been depressed all year. (talk) 07:14, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Recently there has been some cyberbullying related to this article too, so I will recuse myself from further involvement in this article, as I do not wish to encourage such abuse. Hopefully there are enough good editors on Wikipedia to accurately reflect this innocent young woman's tragic death. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 15:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Previous deletion

As stated in the banner up top, this article was voted for deletion in mid-2017, with no deletion review initiated since to recreate it. Subject hasn't done anything to warrant recreation without review, except engage in a social media battle that caused her to kill herself, which becomes an event. Suppose she didn't end her life, was she notable then? — Wyliepedia 06:54, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Are you suggesting the article "Suicide of August Ames"? Or do you recognize that the mainstream media rarely recognizes pornography because of cultural conservatism and thus the article got deleted even though she was a top figure in her industry. Now she's dead, there's media attention, so she passes GNG, simple. I think it's more a slight on this website for not covering a notable person until her death and recognizes the flaw in relying on the media in obviously contentious fields. Or the fact that because of a group of editors our coverage on the English website on this subject is seriously lacking (When does a article ever have 13 articles in different languages before an English one?) GuzzyG (talk) 11:15, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

WP:PORNBIO suggests if she was 'a top figure in her industry' and was recognised as such by her industry i.e. by 'won a well-known and significant industry award' the article should survive AFD. I see our article states she won 2 AVN Awards. Our article on the award suggests these would be considered well-known and significant industry awards assuming they aren't scene awards etc. But a quick search found several sources claiming she did so, but not what awards she won. The best I found was [1] which suggests she may have been a "2015 AVN Awards - Fan Award Winners" but I'm not quite sure if that qualifies (there seem to be maybe 19 people who won that award). There are also various mentions of nominations. Anyway with only 3 participants, I'm not sure if we need a deletion review if sufficient information is presented she clearly meets notability requirements. On the other hand, it seems to me you're trying to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS if you claim she was a top figure in her industry but her industry never recognised that with an award. Nil Einne (talk) 11:54, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not saying anything of the sort ("Suicide of...", "top of the industry"). I'm saying Alsoriano97 compiled several lang-wikis and rebooted this article, which most likely wasn't an improvement from the one that was deleted earlier this year, except for half the article now being about her death. Her one award wasn't from the industry nor her peers; it was from the fans (of which I am one), thus failing notability. At best, she bears mentioning at a cyberbullying article. — Wyliepedia 13:04, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

My interpretation is that the criteria in WP:PORNBIO is in addition to, not exclusive of, the criteria in WP:ENTERTAINER. Specifically criteria no. 2, "Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following." By that criteria August Ames is probably one of the most famous and well known entertainers in the entire world. And surely the AVN fan award is just proof of that. In addition, at Pornhub, the 19th most visited website in the United States according to alexa.com, she is the third most popular pornstar of this year with 440 million views. It seems patently absurd that a figure that attracts nearly half a billion views on a site of that size wouldn't qualify for "Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.".2601:140:8980:106F:6109:4E1F:FE52:BB57 (talk) 01:15, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

I am not convinced that her cyber bullying is being adequately addressed in the article at present. It is clear that she felt bullied and that this was the reason for her death. I struggle to find media articles that do not say so. Given how few suicides that can be so directly attributed to cyber bullying, it is very notable for that, and mentioning it only in a cyber bullying article doesn't do it justice. The comparable Charlotte Dawson had a strong hint that she committed suicide due to bullying, and this one should too. Charlotte Dawson was more well known for her suicide and the bullies that caused it than she was for her fame, and that seems to be the case here as well. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 13:44, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

If I can add my 2 cents, I'd never heard of her before she came up a news feed about cyber bullying, so to me, and undoubtedly to many others that care about the lack of effective laws to protect people from such bullying, she is famous for that, and I for one would be happy for a "Suicide of August Ames" page to exist. However, given that she had a page prior to this, I don't think that we ought to do this. Her suicide is notable, and it adds notability to the article as a whole. Given that the original article already existed, it should be far less likely for it to be deleted now that she has died in a notable way. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 13:01, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Also, looking at other comments there, I think the fact that she has articles in more than a dozen other languages suggests notability as well, especially since English is her native language. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 13:06, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Nonetheless, given the doubt by the original poster, I am happy for this to be nominated for deletion again. I think, given the notability of her suicide, it is more appropriate to nominate it for deletion rather than delete it and put it up for deletion review. But I support the original poster nominating this for deletion, and I will put KEEP in as my response. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 13:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

• She fails pornbio by a country mile but until some time has passed we won’t know if there will be ongoing coverage or whether this will become a oneevent article. Personally, I would leave deletion discussion a while and see what develops. This article is factual and respectful so its not doing harm. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:28, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
• Reading several news articles, it is clear she is receiving coverage all over the world because she was considered a notable, well known, famous and popular adult performer, at least she is considered this way by newspapers and news sites. The oneevent is a nonevent, she suffered depression which is a serious often undiagnosed disease, people get depressed and commit suicide every day, almost never they get articles in newspapers and news sites all over the world if they werent considered important. The article has too many speculations about the cyberbulling claim, a couple Twitter exchanges couldnt lead someone to committing suicide, except if that person already hadnt a major depressive disorder. On the other hand the lack of health safety of male performers who star both in gay and etero porn is an important topic and should be covered somewhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.53.21.228 (talk) 09:18, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

I agree that her mention of this particular gay porn star possibly having AIDS is notable, however there are many question marks about what she meant. She had on dozens of previous occasions had sex with gay porn stars, just not this one. While she didn't publicly state that she thought he had AIDS, many have drawn that conclusion. It seems that the whole "homophobia" thing was a pure invention, and it may have been related to him actually having AIDS. AIDS is that elephant in the room that isn't explicitly mentioned anywhere, but this clearly had nothing to do with homophobia. Wikipedia probably can't mention AIDS without having some proof of a link, but that was basically what she was saying. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 21:10, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Bullshit this clearly had everything to do with homophobia only fellow homophobes and Alt Right people with an agenda are denying that, what she was basically saying is gay and bisexual men are likely to have AIDS she literally said she didn't know what THEY did in their personal lives while ignoring all of the people who pointed out that she doesn't know what ANY porn star does in their personal lives. The fact that she made the argument that gay/bisexual men = AIDS/other diseases and had zero concern about the health status of the other men and women she did scenes with is why she got called out. (talk) 06:58, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

They are higher risk, why deny it? Especially if it increases your own risk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:E287:1900:F14E:36F4:ED97:B0CC (talk) 03:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Daily Mail / testing

As said here [2] I removed the claim that she was concerned about testing standards. It's true that the Daily Mail does say "Ames claimed that medical testing was different for straight vs gay sex scenes" but as per WP:Daily Mail we should take care when using the Daily Mail, frankly we probably shouldn't be using it at all. And as far as I can tell, the Maxim source doesn't say anything about testing. I don't think this is that surprising since AFAIK most of the public stuff comes from Twitter. While ORish, if you look at her tweets (and retweets) she never says anything remotely like the testing standards being different. Actually testing only seemed to come up twice, one she said she never said they don't test, the other is long but it's mostly saying that you can't trust testing because you don't know what goes in someone's private life. And that part isn't a direct tweet but something she retweeted, although it concurs with another tweet where she mentions not knowing what they do in their private lives. It's possible she mentioned testing standards somewhere outside Twitter, or more likely it's something she has discussed before, but as said, we need a much better source for that. Preferably one which likes it to the Twitter mess if it predated that. I suspect there's none and this is simply the Daily Mail putting their own spin on things, as they do. Nil Einne (talk) 13:27, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

DM is not WP:RS plain and simple. It shouldn’t be here at all, least of all covering a topic of this sensitivity. I have removed it. Mramoeba (talk) 20:27, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

The testing thing was mentioned on Twitter extensively, with many Twitter users having done independent research into it, verifying it. Daily Mail is NOT the source on this, and, if we can find the independent research, this should be added back. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 21:04, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I removed the DM citations only. I am in agreement with Mister Sneeze A Lot, if the info is reliably sourced, find the RS and add the information. Mramoeba (talk) 17:09, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I haven't bothered to add it as I don't think it adds to the article in its current form, but we should be aware that, at least on this occasion, Daily Mail are not a primary source, as they were referencing other sources, just that they didn't quote them. As I understand it, August Ames was in fact stating her belief that the man she was to have sex with had AIDS. It was not an attack on homosexuality at all, as she had had sex with many gay and bisexual men. It was rather saying that this particular man had AIDS. Again, this hasn't been mentioned in any newspapers so we cannot state it on Wikipedia, and it may be dangerous to mention this part about gay men being more likely to be unsafe (it is factual that gay male sex is by far the most likely way to get AIDS) because it is distracting from the point. We also don't know for sure that the man she referred to had AIDS - nor can we be sure who that man was. All we can say is that her argument was that she believed he was a health risk. We can't even say that she believed he had AIDS as she didn't say that - others did. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 02:53, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Once again you are spreading lies and rumors from Twitter and stating it as fact on here to push your Alt Right narrative, she had zero evidence to suggest he had any disease much less AIDS she said it solely because he did gay scenes which is a blatant attack on homosexuality. Not to mention her flat out saying that being a gay or bisexual man automatically makes you more likely to have AIDS which is why people initially started criticizing her for parroting that homophobic talking point, she also said that the only reason she did those scenes with gay/bisexual men in the past was because she didn't know that they had done gay scenes and if she knew she wouldn't have had sex with them. The fact you keep pretending there was no reason for anyone to think her statements were homophobic just shows you have those same homophobic views yourself and trying to frame this article to reflect those views confirms that you're one of the Alt Right clowns who highjacked her suicide to support your agenda. (talk) 13:24, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

c class

https://ores.wmflabs.org/v2/scores/enwiki/wp10/814942483 -- Marthadandridge (talk) 23:51, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I think you wrote that wrong. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 02:54, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• La-california-usa-16th-jan-2015-adult-film-actress-august-ames-arrives-EEGHNX.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:21, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Jon Ronson's audiobook

This article discusses an overview of her death and the circumstances surrounding Ronson's book ("The Last Days of August"). I don't think this page (the Wiki entry for Ames' death) properly conveys the surmises that Ronson reached. 99.229.43.127 (talk) 20:22, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Could you explain a bit more what the key differences or mistakes in the current article are? Or better yet, fix the article's summary yourself with that news source as a reference (you can do so even without creating an account)? — Bilorv (talk) 12:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)