Talk:Savannah (actress)

Undid reversion

The reverter gave this rationale: "No tangible improvement, please discuss on Talk if any edits are significant". Obviously, s/he didn't recognize the need for improvements I'd made to the grammar/mechanics/references/readability. Moreover, not sure why that person feels so proprietary about the page. I can see reverting changes that detract from an article or that add unreferenced information. But in this case, the person misused the power of reversion. - Froid (talk) 04:38, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

For the most part you edits were inconsequential and not any significant improvement. You made minor grammar changes (calling them "Major copy edits" in the edit summary, an abuse in and of itself) and added no content. You also messed up some coding in one of the sections that I just fixed along with several references. Thank you for your interest in the subject and the article, but your changes are so minor, I'm not going to bother to revert them. Regards, --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 05:28, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

One, your nasty tone reflects the very reason why Wikipedia's editorial culture is criticized. I suggest trying on a more civil, professional one. Secondly, I can't believe you're happy to live with grammatical errors (as your post indicates you are). Thirdly, I've set up my account so I'm alerted if I break any formatting so I can fix it. Fourthly, you don't own the article -- no one does: not its originator, and not any of the editors. Accordingly, you might want to reevaluate your proprietary stance toward the article. Froid (talk) 15:44, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Since this communication is written, the only "nastiness" involved is what you have created in your mind. So I suggest that you take your own advice. I invite you to fix actual grammatical errors where ever you find them, but also ask that you to remember that this is an encyclopedia and not a tabloid. By the way, I am a member of the Pornography Project. If you are interested in articles like this, you are welcome to join the project and be part of a group effort. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:43, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 1 March 2015

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved as proposed. Since there is no convention requiring the use of a particular disambiguator with respect to professionals in this particular genre, WP:CONCISE is a legitimate basis for moving this page (as is the subject's extension into other genres of acting), and consensus is roughly 2-1 in favor of this move. bd2412 T 19:35, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Savannah (pornographic actress) → Savannah (actress) – This redirect should be the other way around; per reasoning in this edit summary, there is no mainstream actress named Savannah to disambiguate from. Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 10:36, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

• Support - makes reasonable sense to me. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
• Comment both the current and proposed names are somewhat ambiguous, there being another porn star named Savanna Samson -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 04:07, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose as previous RMs , restore any articles which have been moved In ictu oculi (talk) 10:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• Support - I don't see the point in being overly specific. There are no other actresses known simply as "Savannah". Dismas|^(talk) 14:11, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose for now without further input. I thought there was a consensus or guideline at one time that called for using "(pornographic actress)" instead of "(actress)" in cases such as this (but I can't find it). I have posted a notice at WT:PORNO to get more input. —  AjaxSmack  15:07, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Evidently, no such consensus or guideline exists or existed. —  AjaxSmack  03:49, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose. Acting really isn't her forte! -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:20, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Nice tag team editing/commenting folks[1][2], even word for word... :) --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 17:47, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

No "tag team" involved (not entirely sure what that's supposed to imply). I check WP:RM every week and comment on those that I choose to comment on. These two articles are listed one above the other, both are on similar subjects and I oppose the proposed move for the same reasons. I suspect other editors do the same thing. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:51, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

• Support per WP:PRECISE. Betty Logan (talk) 23:20, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

That is a possible misreading of Wikipedia:Article titles#Precision and disambiguation which refers mainly to base title not to maximizing the brevity of the dab used, since no one types the dab. In this case as Category:American female pornographic film actors the category distinguishes from film/theatre actors. Remember that Precision (brevity) is only 1 of 5 WP:CRITERIA. The others would lead us to describe as book sources describe, and book sources don't generally use just "actor/actress" for pornstars. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:11, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose. Same as this case: [3]. --Sammy1339 (talk) 23:38, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
• Support per WP:PRECISE. There is absolutely no reason to include "pornographic" in the disambiguator, and none of the oppose !votes here have given any reason that I can see. Furthermore, to insist on using the adjective when it is not necessary is POV, as it carries with it the implication that she is not a legitimate actress. That is not our call to make.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose per lead of article "was an American pornographic film actress." Why make the title more ambiguous or is the lead wrong? --Richhoncho (talk) 22:41, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
• Strong support, no dab needed per WP:PRECISE, unnecessary disambiguator, POV and probably derogatory. Cavarrone 06:46, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Comment only. I note that some are supporting on the grounds that "pornographic actress" may be POV and/or derogatory. In which case the category needs to be renamed too, merged in to Category:Actresses, perhaps? Cheers, --Richhoncho (talk) 09:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Don't mix apples and oranges, please, choosing titles and set categories are different fields. Category:American pornographic film actors includes actors who had established mainstream careers and very short venues in adult industry, similarly actresses such as Savannah and Aya are included in Category:20th-century American actresses, which includes both adult and mainstream actors, without any division. Categories support multiple specific sub-categorizations, that's why we have for actors such as John Wayne categories such as Category:Male Western (genre) film actors. And that's why we have Robert Gordon (actor) and NOT Robert Gordon (silent film actor), Harry Shannon (actor) and NOT Harry Shannon (character actor), Bob Steele (actor) and NOT Bob Steele (western genre actor). Cavarrone 11:54, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I am not mixing apples and oranges, but trying square the circle. The article says she is a pornographic actress, she is categorized as such, yet you say the title might be "POV and probably derogatory" if it said "pornographic actress." If you right are then WP has a major problem, especially in respect of living pornographic actresses. Just saying. --Richhoncho (talk) 13:41, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

You are not squaring the circle, you are just wikilawyering, and egregiously ignoring my response above. If you want your comments to be taken seriously, then, please fill a move request from Robert Gordon (actor) to Robert Gordon (silent film actor) (as he is "categorized as such"). Or just request to remove Category:American pornographic film actors from the main category Category:American film actors. Cavarrone 14:08, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I am neither wikilawyering, nor ignoring your response, save that your response did not respond to mine, but wandered off in a different direction. My comment was in respect of the use of the word "pornographic." I really don't think the issue of "POV and probably derogatory" is applicable when you call them, for instance, "Silent film actor" as opposed to "Film Actor" or "20th-century actresses" etc etc. --Richhoncho (talk) 15:17, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

To clarify: I don't see the point in asking an additional, specific disambiguation for pornographic actors, and at the same time not requesting the same with "Silent film actors", "Western genre film actors" and similar. They are all sub-categorizations of the main category "actors", but apparently all the latter could be disambiguate by a simple "(actor/actress)", while pornographic actors should be marked by a scarlet letter in the title, even when there are no other actors who would require such a specification... that's what sounds derogatory and POV for me, not per se, but because of the "double standard" we should apply, one only for pornographic actors, one another for all the other actors. Cavarrone 16:04, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

You both realize that you agree with each other on this topic, right? --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 17:49, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Probably, given the subject matter, we are a pair of t*ts who have managed to fall out, so to speak. Calling a pornographic actress a pornographic actress cannot be POV or derogatory because it is true... But I am happy to accept Cavarrone's final explanation as to what he meant to say. --Richhoncho (talk) 20:25, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

• Support per nom and WP:CONCISE. -- Calidum 03:11, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
• Support not because of nonsense references to WP:CONCISE etc. which seem to forget that titles are meant to be descriptive but because she has been in other B movies such as The Invisible Maniac in which Savannah starred. GregKaye 08:44, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

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) 18:59, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

• Support Came across the Aja discussion and realized that some people may think porn actors are working in some kind of reality show (or worse, hidden camera program). They are actors, acting in a film. They get paid to act. I don't think Wikipedia lists other actors according to their genre (Horror film actor, Comedy actress, etc.) so it seems odd that one genre (and I know it when I see it, which, my first name withstanding, isn't often) has been selected for more title identification. Randy Kryn 14:07 5 April, 2015 (UTC)

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

(actress)/(pornographic actress) RfC

An RfC which may affect this article's title is currently taking place (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pornography#RfC: Should a person who has appeared in exclusively pornographic films be described as "(actor/-tress)" or "(pornographic actor/-tress)"?). Rebecca1990 (talk) 07:39, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Porno. And put ‘actress’ in quotes. 2A00:23C5:E0A0:8300:40D0:2732:F5DD:70B7 (talk) 00:07, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Savannah (actress). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://avnawards.avn.com/past/winners/1992

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:31, 31 March 2016 (UTC)