Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hollie Steel

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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.

information Administrator note The "keep" decision below was changed to no consensus after discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009_May_4.--Aervanath (talk) 06:52, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The result was keep. No solid consensus, thus defaulting to keep, which I think had a more solid following anyhow after consideration of all things said.

247 08:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Hollie Steel

Hollie Steel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Otterathome (talk) 17:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

  • You are still misunderstanding and misapplying
    WP:BLP1E which says, "if the individual's role within it is substantial", they merit coverage. It is only if they "essentially remains a low-profile individual" that coverage is not merited. This is not the case here - the subject is now a notable star, her history is notable and this is demonstrated by coverage of all aspects of her life. Colonel Warden (talk) 17:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • What we expect in coverage is
    WP:CRYSTAL, which is the reseon my opinion is rather weak. I expect coverage too, but we have to base the decision on weather we should keep or delete on the currect situation. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 19:25, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • My interpetation of almost certain to take place is a little narrower. The finals of Britain's got talent IMO is almost certain to take place. That Steel is going to be in it, not so much. That it is almost certain that something will become notable, is not something I believe
    WP:CRYSTAL is supposed to be supporting, but rather seems exactly what it is warning against. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • She's currently the 9/2 second favorite. The only way she's not going the distance is some kind of accdent/disqualification which would cause an even greater media frenzy. Colonel Warden (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • So? It's still a gamble.
    WP:CRYSTAL doesn't care what odds the bookies give unless it's objectively 100%. — Gwalla | Talk 18:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Please read the
    text book and quote the part where it says to delete anything. All I see is "In such cases, a merge of the information and a redirect of the person's name to the event article are usually the better options.". So your conclusion doesn't match the guideline you cite. Colonel Warden (talk) 13:41, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
"Usually the better options." In this case, the 1E is "appeared on a TV show". I see nothing to differentiate this contestant from other contestants who've appeared on similar TV shows and do not have Wikipedia articles. If she were listed with all the other contestants of Britain's Got Talent, as is done with articles for some other reality TV shows, I wouldn't have a problem with that. - Brian Kendig (talk) 17:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are misinterpreting both policies.
    WP:BLP1E doesn't mean what you assert as we have lots of articles about people notable for just one thing, such as Rosa Parks and Gavrilo Princip. The point of this guideline is that people on the fringes of a famous event do not merit separate articles if they are not the focus of the event. An example in this case would be Hollie Steel's brother. He gets quite a few mentions for appearing in the same audition and for his mentoring of his sister. But he doesn't rate separate coverage because he is not the focus of the reporting. Colonel Warden (talk) 23:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • We use English language sources by preference as this is the English language Wikipedia. But please see:
  1. Hollie Steel, la nueva rival de Susan Boyle - Spain
  2. Hollie Steel va-t-elle voler la vedette à Susan Boyle ? - France
  3. Hollie Steel macht Susan Boyle Konkurrenz - Germany
  4. Állva tapsolt Hollie-nak a közönség a brit „Csillag születik - Hungary
  5. Hollie (10) kan stoppe Susan Boyles drøm - Norway
  6. HOLLIE, 10 ANNI, NUOVO IDOLO BOOM DEL VIDEO SU YOUTUBE - Italy
  7. 蘇珊大媽自塑形象被損 《英國達人》有驚人發現 - China
  8. Hollie Steel Emerges As Competition For Susan Boyle On 'Britain's Got Talent' - USA— Preceding unsigned comment added by Colonel Warden (talk • contribs)
  • Rosa Parks merits an article for being an icon of the civil rights movement. The coverage of her in secondary sources is sustained, persistent over time, and of great length. Her contribution to the history of the United States is enduring and significant. Hollie Steel is a flash-in-the-pan celebrity (a game show contestant for crying out loud) who may or may not attain lasting historical significance. In fact, odds are very strong against it. This is precisely what
    WP:NOT#NEWS are about: keeping the encyclopedia from becoming cluttered with biographies of people enjoying their 15 minutes of fame. RayTalk 02:17, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Indeed, from BLP1E, "If the event is significant, and/or if the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate article for the person may be appropriate." Massive difference between Rosa Parks' iconic status in the civil rights movement and a prepubescent game show contestant on an ongoing show. BGT is not an event, it's a TV reality show and there's a huge difference between an inciting event in the sweeping change of race relations in the US, and Simon Cowell hurting her feelings and it getting reported as a bit of fluff in the news. This deletion debate should be re-opened after she gets booted off and the discussion resumed then. We can't tell right now if she's truly a BLP1E or not.
complex 13:53, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
How do we judge significance? Per
WP:FLUFF policy which lets you pick and choose. Colonel Warden (talk) 14:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
Did you just equate Rosa Parks, whose actions had far-reaching consequences for American life and who has been profiled in every school textbook on American history published in the last few decades, with a preteen game show contestant? Seriously? — Gwalla | Talk 15:47, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So what you're saying is
WP:BLP1E doesn't apply to American icons. I'm saying that it doesn't apply to outstanding British singers who get lots of press coverage. There's room enough for both and no requirement to delete either. Colonel Warden (talk) 17:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
If the event is significant, and/or if the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate article for the person may be appropriate. You're saying that the
Civil Rights Movement was insignificant? (Also, for the record, Rosa Parks's public fame came from one act, but it's hardly the only significant thing she did). This little kid's (single, AFAICT) appearance on a TV talent show is not in the same ballpark, not in the same league, not even in the same sport. I wouldn't necessarily oppose a redirect to the season article, but there's no way this little girl merits an article of her own, and frankly there isn't much of substance to merge. — Gwalla | Talk 18:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
5 out of 8 of those sources mention
Otterathome (talk) 14:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
BLP1E: If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a particular event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, low profile, then a separate biography is unlikely to be warranted. Since the biography currently exists, I read that as "recommending deletion." Incidentally, Rosa Parks is covered by the third paragraph of BLP1E: If the event is significant, and/or if the individual's role within it is substantial. - Brian Kendig (talk) 16:57, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your reading is incorrect. Per
    WP:BLPDEL, "Page deletion should be treated as a last resort". The equation that WP:BLP1E = deletion is quite mistaken. If there aren't enough sources for a reasonable article then the obvious alternative, as stated, is merger into the article about the 1E. Colonel Warden (talk) 17:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Do you feel that 'merge and redirect' would be an appropriate outcome? You have a point with your comment above about the American Idol participants being in Wikipedia; do you feel there should be a Britain's Got Talent participants article, and would you have any interest in starting it? - Brian Kendig (talk) 12:56, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are numerous articles for this show per
Britain's Got Talent (series 3) or Susan Boyle. Colonel Warden (talk) 16:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
'keep' and punish for nominating after just 2 hours... rediculous.--Dacium (talk) 09:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a rationale, that's a vote, which is specifically cautioned against
complex 13:53, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

If Wikipedia did not have an article on such a newsworthy person, it would detract from the whole point of this resource. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spotvega (talk • contribs) 15:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Enough with nominating every single BgT performer for deletion. Because the news has already made her an international celebrity, and given her age, she definitely passes

WP:N. And per previous precedents, Susan Boyle and Shaheen Jafargholi, this article should stay. --haha169 (talk) 04:35, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Besides? You don't get to ignore the evidence. Those few articles now number over 330. Most other contestants on this show get nothing like this. Colonel Warden (talk) 08:10, 3 May 2009 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hollie_Steel&oldid=1142205363"