Wiki143:Articles for deletion/Jasmine Murray

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. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 00:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Jasmine Murray

Template:La (delete) – (View log)

Since other finalists are being deleted, let's discuss everyone. --Cinemaniac86^Oy_gevalt. 16:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

• Keep - Seems notable. Cinemaniac86 seems to have gone on a nominating spree. Jenuk1985 | Talk 16:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
• Comment - this is as a result of the delete close at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alexis_Grace_(2nd_nomination). Personally, I think a redirect would be a far better outcome of this process. Fritzpoll (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - But still, what is the argument for deletion for this article, not a different article. It is Jasmine Murray that is being discussed, not Alexis Grace. Jenuk1985 | Talk 16:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete or redirect to American Idol (season 8). Whilst the nomination appears a little pointed, I think these should be discussed on the same grounds as the participants at Alexis Grace mentioned. A lack of notability beyond the single event (per WP:BLP1E) of being in American Idol. WikiProject precedents or standards are irrelevant in comparison to our own policies - we already have an article covering the event, so individual articles can be merged there if there is any additional material, in which case a redirect should take place. Fritzpoll (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Without having too much knowledge of the article... "If the event is significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article for the person is sometimes appropriate." could probably be applied here, as I understand it American Idol is a rather large event over there, and the contestants have a rather large role within it. Jenuk1985 | Talk 17:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
    • I seriously wish these had been nommed all together - save our copy-pasting! :) I don't think the event is significant - I interpret that to refer to something more important than a TV show. Say the assassin in a presidential assassin - you would expect an article on them, because it was a significant event - a TV show is unlikely to be significant in the same way. Your mileage may, of course, vary Fritzpoll (talk) 17:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
      • In the grand scheme of things, this TV show is a very significant TV show, not just to television, but to the music industry too. I agree that what I quoted is open to interpretation, but looking at things relatively, it seems to apply. Jenuk1985 | Talk 17:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
        • But the section you quoted clearly refers to historical significance. In full, it reads: If the event is significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article for the person is sometimes appropriate. Individuals notable for well-documented historic events, for example John Hinckley, Jr., fit into this category. The historic significance of events should be indicated by the persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role. Transient press coverage of a story does not generally indicate an individual who would meet this exception, even if there are multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. - there is no evidence of persistent coverage of these individuals, so they don't get articles...yet! If any of them get to number 1, or anything like that, then the articles should be recreated. But they aren't notable just for being in the TV show, which is essentially a temporary event, meaning that all coverage of them is transient until they do something else. Fritzpoll (talk) 17:22, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
          • I read the last bit of that section as giving an example of the application of the guideline, rather than saying it only applies to historical significance. Jenuk1985 | Talk 17:28, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

• • • • • • • I'm pretty certain it's to do with historical significance, because it meshes with WP:NOT#NEWS and WP:SBST in terms of Wikipedia's desire to only record individuals who have historical significance. Fritzpoll (talk) 17:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete or Redirect to series article. Per WP:BLP1E, the subject is only notable for one event. If the subject becomes notable outside of this event, they may warrant an article. In addition, I'm concerned about the article's poor level of sourcing per WP:BIO - for a biography of a living person the required standard of sourcing is set quite high. This content would be much more suitable in the series article already mentioned. In addition, this article fails WP:RS as it has no reliable, secondary sources indepenent of the subject. Gazimoff 17:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep and comment - Unlike some others, she HAS pre-Idol notability as well in her pageantry. Some pageant contestants have articles even without additional events. Even if she was cut in the semi-finals, I would say keep for her. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep She's not notable for just American Idol, she also competed in Miss America's Outstanding Teen. (If it is redirected, I don't see any need to delete the article history. Just protect the redirect if it's recreated without consensus) - Mgm|^(talk) 23:21, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Per CrazyC83 and Mgm. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 23:53, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Notable Idol contestant, needs full articles like the rest of Idol's finalists. Pageant info, Idol info, and soon Post-idol status. Candyo32 (talk) 23:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Idol finalists get own articles. This is nonsense.--Jojhutton (talk) 02:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

  This doesn't represent a reason why the article meets the wider policies for inclusion. Please see WP:ILIKEIT. Gazimoff 07:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Keep -beauty queen.--23prootie (talk) 03:18, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Keep per CrazyC83, MacGyverMagic and 23prootie. --ApprenticeFan Messages Work 14:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - all the keep arguments above are basically stating past precedent, which doesn't override WP:BIO and WP:BLP1E. Unless she does something else notable in the future that changes her notability, no one will remember nor care about her next season. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 20:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

In her case, it is not a one-event notability. CrazyC83 (talk) 22:45, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

• Keep - Passes multiple criteria in WP:Music, most importantly #9: "Has won or placed in a major music competition." American Idol is one of the biggest music competitions.
• Strong Keep - Explained my stance on the deletion of these articles numerous times before. Gage (talk) 21:47, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

  I examined your previous contribs, and cannot find information on any previous AfDs before these. Could you indicate where I might be able to find this previous stance? Many thanks Gazimoff 00:20, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

  I have suggeted that the articles be kept until a guideline is established on how to deal with these articles but the debate should happen in between seasons. Deleting them now would only inflame the situation and we'll have to deal wuth crazy fans annoyed that their favorite got deleted (Note: See User:Fritzpoll). For now the articles should stay. Please bear with that.--23prootie (talk) 02:16, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

• Slam-dunk Keep Notability established via her status as one of the top 13 finalists on this season's American Idol, as well as her previous competitions. --74.95.135.46 (talk) 16:42, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep. Yes they are notable. Look at how much coverage they get when eliminated. And we never know what will happen later. Chris Sligh has written a hit for Rascal Flatts 2 years after being on the show. Actually almost 3. --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 18:50, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep - Point nomination, article passes criteria #1 and #9 of WP:MUSICBIO, thereby passing WP:BIO. Aspects (talk) 21:38, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

• Per the note at the bottom of WP:MUSICBIO, I'd argue that the sbject isn't notable outside of the contest they're taking part in, and that a redirect may be appropriate. Gazimoff 21:58, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

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.