Talk:Flava Works

Notable Performers?

This section does not establish that the listed persons meet Wikipedia's definition of notability, under WP:BIO. At the very least, references should be included to establish that they at least meet the basic criteria in that guideline: "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject." Better yet, if they trully meet the criteria of being notable, then they should have their own articles and wikilinks to those articles should be used. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

This is true, however, outside reliable sources, including GAYVN and XBIZ are considered to be reliable sources and those people written about in these notable publications, are also considered to be notable. [[User:# YoungEditorXXX|# YoungEditorXXX]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by YoungEditorXXX (talk • contribs) 19:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

rating

I've rated this article as C, per the request at the LGBT project. I think the writing is fine, and the sources look good. It wouldn't take much to be a B class - it needs a longer lead that summarises the article, and some of the section structure needs to be looked at as some sentences are left unclear (eg first line of "Defiance" refers to another section, would be better if both were under one section: I would put "Contoversies" as a main section, with the controversies and defience as subheadings of that. Good work so far!Yobmod (talk) 16:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Advertising

Additions of lists of non-notable names, non-notable awards and direct links to websites selling products (beyomd the official site) is an obvious attempt at advertising. An IP user keeps readding them, presumably with a onflict of Interest. They should not be added - wikipediais not a free advertsiing hosting site.07:11, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

• That's correct. I've dealt with this same problem on this page in the past. Themfromspace (talk) 09:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with you. The awards listed are notable. Both Cybersocket and GAYVN are the industry standard awards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.242.146.231 (talk) 05:27, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for doing so. My additions to the article and basics for inclusion of these awards is an attempt to balance this page instead of it being a one-sided focus of FlavaWorks. These awards are given by highly esteemed industry entities. Juniorthegreat (talk) 00:41, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

201.19.101.162 (talk) 15:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC) Your incorrect! GAYVN and Cybersocket are the standard in the industry and any awards, nominations or other coming from them two should be listed, this includes porn stars who were nominated for these awards. Keep this section.

If these are important "industry standard" awards, why can no-one find any reliable secondary sources documenting them?YobMod 13:09, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Reverted to February 17, 2009, Version

After consultation with an experienced Wikipedian, I have reverted the article to its February 17 state. The revisions that have occurred since then violate the Wikipedia's policy against bias (NPOV). They represent an attempt to advertise and defend Flava Works, instead of presenting information of encyclopedic interest. GBataille (talk) 20:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with my revisions violating Wikipedia's policy against bias (NPOV). My revisions included your original work, references and facts. My intentions of the revision were to create an article that informed and provided the reader with an overall viewpoint regarding the company, rather as you would, a one sided view. You only list the negative aspects of the company, it's legal matters an its outcome. The article written by GBataille currently portrays it to be such a foul and nasty company, which in some opinions is not. It does appear that this user, as the author, has a grudge or personal vendetta against Flava Works. It can clearly be viewed based upon his work. So my question to you is, as you have the article written currently (Which a "C" rating is not something to be proud of. I am also confident that my revision would have obtained a much higher one.) Does my revisions violate Wikipedia's policy against bias or does yours? Juniorthegreat (talk) 01:02, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I have made a good-faith effort to be neutral. I do not think that the article suggests anywhere that Flava Works is "foul and nasty." It describes the controversies surrounding the company in a way that is based either on official documents (from the City of Chicago, the courts, etc.) or on reports by reputable news stations. Even in depicting the reactions to the company from the gay black community, I have made sure to cite both critics and supporters. I obviously do not object to Juniorthegreat or anyone else changing and improving the article. But I wonder if it's an improvement to cite the company's CEO at great length from the company's own website, or to mention GAYVN Awards without saying that Flava Works did, in fact, not receive any of the awards for which it was nominated. Again, I have no axe to grind here at all; I'm just trying to be an impartial observer. Please do not hesitate to point out any inaccuracies in the article and to update it. On the other hand, Wikipedia's readers are not served well by an article that reads like an advertising piece and contains factual errors. GBataille (talk) 22:11, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

GBataille's Constant Vandalism of page

GBataille continues an edit war and vandalizes a page he has a personal and vested interest in. The [edit made [1]] by Juniorthegreat is balanced and contains useful, non-advertising information that is in no one's (GBataille, Flavaworks, or anyone's) best interest.

Juniorthegreat wrote a great piece for a young wikipedian, however, GBataille's bulling and edit war of his and other young editors works are childish. I suggest that others join in and review this page, it has potential to be a B article but the way GBataille wrote it, it will not.

4 users are agains thte version that lists the performers and non-notable, unverfied awards. GBataile, Themfromspace, Barak and Yobmod. Consensus is against the clearly COI version you keep trying to onflict. Wikipedia is not a repository for listing unverfied cruft or advertising. These edits have already resulted in the lowering of the rating from the LGBT project, as all experienced editors think they are detrimental to wikipedia.YobMod 08:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Unanimous user, I thank you for your kind words regarding my work. I do wish that others would review the article revision I created so that it can reflect the opinions of more users and editors. Rather just the four listed. The awards are all verifiable on CyberSocket as well as GAYVN's respective websites. It lists the year as well as the award that Flava Works received. So, they are in fact verifiable and credible sources. Ok, so given that the "so-called" advertising pieces are removed, my revisions still reflect a more through overview of the company. The lowering of the rating resulted from the poor taste and piece of original work, not my revisions. If the article was a true depiction of the company to begin with, we would not be facing this problem. (Juniorthegreat (talk) 20:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC))

A version containing your whole rewrite, but without the list of performers and links to selling websites was reverted, as are any other changes (removing the accusations of racism sourced from a blog, removing a broken link) so attempting to review and combine the best of the 2 versions can only happen if the article is left in it's current version, and changes are discussed.YobMod 06:42, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Uncited awards

{{editprotected}} Can an admin check the list of awards. AFAICT, some are "cited" by wikilinks to articles that do not mention the work or publisher at all (checked using ctrl F), and others link to a webpage that does not contain the information. Maybe it is in a subpage there? Checked the 2003 awads page, there is no "Thugboy" found.

As the whole section is without sources, the links given either do not mention or contradict them, has a consensus against it as advertising, and no-one responds to the fact that a nomination for these awards does not indicate any quality assessment (all works put forward are "nominees"), i think the section should be moved here to talk until it is sorted out and sourced.YobMod 12:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

If you could be more specific about which ones need to go and which ones need to stay, or if you can provide references then please do. For the moment I've cleaned it up a little and added {{unreferenced section}}. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I have no idea which are notable or true. I didn't add them, so have no source. They need both sourcing, and detirmination of which are notable achievments.

Flava Works has received several awards over the years.

• 2006 AEBN VOD Award for Best Gay Amateur
• CyberSocket Best Latin Theme Adult Site 2006-2008 PapiCock
• CyberSocket Best Black Theme Adult Site 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 ThugBoy
• Nominated for the 2009 GayVN Award for Best Ethnic Latin Themed Film Santo Domingo 2
• Nominated for GayVN Best Threesome in an adult film feature RockaFellaz Entertainment
• Nominated for GayVN Best Top - Rock, Rockafellaz Entertainment

I do see the listing of past winners of the CyberSocketWeb Awards. From their webpage, the Cybersocket Web Awards describes itself as only event of its kind honoring the best GLBT websites. I checked each of the awards that are above and I do see them listed as past winners for each of the years. The CyberSocket Best Latin Theme Adult Site 2006 was awarded to PapiCock in 2006. The CyberSocket Best Latin Theme Adult Site 2006 was awarded to PapiCock in 2007. The CyberSocket Best Latin Theme Adult Site 2006 was awarded to PapiCock in 2008.

All of the ThugBoy awards were listed as well. I would consider the CyberSocket Web Awards to be the acceptable industry standard and note that it's all the website states that it does. (Amiel360 (talk) 05:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC))

• I find the following:

1. 2008 Golden Dickie Awards winner of Best Ethnic Studio - "2008 Golden Dickie Awards Winners". RAD Video.
2. 2010 XBIZ Awards nominee for Gay Studio of the Year - http://www.xbiz.com/news/news_piece.php?id=115720

Ash (talk) 10:49, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

((Dreamboy792XD)) Best Notable working models/actors/stars

((Dreamboy792XD)) Bold textI think that Breion Diamond, Skittlez, Mr. Saukie, Baby Boy, Vishus, Dangerzone, All the rockafells, Baby Star, are ther greatest dick suckn men in the universe they're so HOT if you think better name the guys you like and the video they participated in thank you. ((Dreamboy792XD))(````) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.108.9 (talk) 05:25, 11 June 2010 (UTC)