| Revision as of 16:03, 14 April 2009 editSarekOfVulcan (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators51,783 edits comment on dubious relisting← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:21, 14 April 2009 edit undoPeterSymonds (talk | contribs)29,055 edits Closing debate, result was keepNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' | |||
| <!--Template:Afd top | |||
| Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> | |||
| The result was '''keep'''. Consensus is quite clear at this point. <font face="Arial"> ] (])</font> 16:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|M}} | |||
| :{{la|Susan Boyle}} (<span class="plainlinks">]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude> | :{{la|Susan Boyle}} (<span class="plainlinks">]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude> | ||
| Line 506: | Line 512: | ||
| *'''Keep'''. Article has reliable sources, we've got plenty of room to host the article, notability though currently derived from a single event, is likely to grow considering the nature of the show, plus all the relisting for dubious procedural reasons is getting out of hand. ] <small>]</small> 16:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC) | *'''Keep'''. Article has reliable sources, we've got plenty of room to host the article, notability though currently derived from a single event, is likely to grow considering the nature of the show, plus all the relisting for dubious procedural reasons is getting out of hand. ] <small>]</small> 16:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
| **Actually, I'd say it's the multiple dubious ''closes'' that are the problem, not the relistings. :-)--] (]) 16:03, 14 April 2009 (UTC) | **Actually, I'd say it's the multiple dubious ''closes'' that are the problem, not the relistings. :-)--] (]) 16:03, 14 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div> | |||
Revision as of 16:21, 14 April 2009
- 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. Consensus is quite clear at this point. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Susan Boyle
- Susan Boyle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
At this moment, she does not satisfy notability guidelines. Yes, she may have been noted by the media, but she is just "another auditionee" on a TV talent show. D.M.N. (talk) 12:11, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- I disagree with deletion. At the moment, there are over 65,000 views on her youtube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY), thus granting her a significant cult following. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.148.125.126 (talk) 12:48, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Delete: it's a premature article creation. Alexius08 (talk) 13:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Youtube video views are not considered according to Wiki policies. Also, being a contestant on a TV show does not automatically guarantee notability, and the material in the article is not suitable for an encyclopedia. Antivenin 14:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:GNG: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." Sources are reliable, independent, and coverage is significant. That was my thought process. --\/\/slack (talk) 14:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Keep over 250K youtube views already amongst well over 50 videos (edit: now over 350K on one vid alone R3ap3R.inc (talk) 20:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)), and the #1 story on Digg.com today BY A LONG SHOT (over twice the diggs of the second hottest story). R3ap3R.inc (talk) 16:03, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Youtube does not establish notability. This has been repeated countless times. Antivenin 16:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- No, but the Times and the Telegraph combined do establish notability. R3ap3R.inc (talk) 17:42, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- As for YouTube, the awards that this clip recieved already should make it notable:
Honors for this video (101)
- 1 - Most Discussed (Today) - United Kingdom
- 4 - Most Discussed (Today)
- 1 - Most Discussed (Today) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 1 - Most Discussed (Today) - Entertainment
- 13 - Most Discussed (This Week) - United Kingdom
- 5 - Most Discussed (This Week) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 58 - Most Discussed (This Week) - Entertainment
- 82 - Most Discussed (This Month) - United Kingdom
- 16 - Most Discussed (This Month) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 8 - Most Responded (Today) - United Kingdom
- 52 - Most Responded (Today)
- 2 - Most Responded (Today) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 9 - Most Responded (Today) - Entertainment
- 38 - Most Responded (This Week) - United Kingdom
- 9 - Most Responded (This Week) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 58 - Most Responded (This Week) - Entertainment
- 13 - Most Viewed (Today) - Germany
- 2 - Most Viewed (Today) - Australia
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Canada
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - United Kingdom
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Ireland
- 30 - Most Viewed (Today) - India
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - New Zealand
- 6 - Most Viewed (Today) - Israel
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today)
- 8 - Most Viewed (Today) - Spain
- 29 - Most Viewed (Today) - Mexico
- 12 - Most Viewed (Today) - France
- 36 - Most Viewed (Today) - South Korea
- 3 - Most Viewed (Today) - Netherlands
- 12 - Most Viewed (Today) - Poland
- 47 - Most Viewed (Today) - Brazil
- 69 - Most Viewed (Today) - Russia
- 3 - Most Viewed (Today) - Hong Kong
- 4 - Most Viewed (Today) - Czech Republic
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Sweden
- 2 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Germany
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Australia
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Canada
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Ireland
- 44 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - India
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - New Zealand
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Israel
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Spain
- 4 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Mexico
- 3 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - France
- 9 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Italy
- 60 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Japan
- 21 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - South Korea
- 2 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Netherlands
- 4 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Poland
- 17 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Brazil
- 12 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Russia
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Hong Kong
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Czech Republic
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Sweden
- 32 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Australia
- 63 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Canada
- 1 - Most Viewed (This Week) - United Kingdom
- 5 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Ireland
- 24 - Most Viewed (This Week) - New Zealand
- 11 - Most Viewed (This Week)
- 42 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Netherlands
- 2 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Sweden
- 68 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Germany
- 5 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Australia
- 7 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Canada
- 1 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 3 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Ireland
- 10 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - New Zealand
- 24 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Israel
- 3 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment
- 99 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Spain
- 52 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - France
- 6 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Netherlands
- 47 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Poland
- 23 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Czech Republic
- 1 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Sweden
- 1 - Top Favorited (Today) - United Kingdom
- 1 - Top Favorited (Today)
- 1 - Top Favorited (Today) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 1 - Top Favorited (Today) - Entertainment
- 3 - Top Favorited (This Week) - United Kingdom
- 85 - Top Favorited (This Week)
- 1 - Top Favorited (This Week) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 10 - Top Favorited (This Week) - Entertainment
- 44 - Top Favorited (This Month) - United Kingdom
- 6 - Top Favorited (This Month) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 97 - Top Favorited (This Month) - Entertainment
- 1 - Top Rated (Today) - United Kingdom
- 3 - Top Rated (Today)
- 1 - Top Rated (Today) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 1 - Top Rated (Today) - Entertainment
- 1 - Top Rated (This Week) - United Kingdom
- 13 - Top Rated (This Week)
- 1 - Top Rated (This Week) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 7 - Top Rated (This Week) - Entertainment
- 57 - Top Rated (This Month) - United Kingdom
- 7 - Top Rated (This Month) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- Strong keep and consider merging. Why wasn't this one sentence stub simply merged into the Britain's Got Talent page, instead of being immediatly nominated for deletion, which ignored WP:PRESERVE and WP:BEFORE? Ikip (talk) 16:02, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- I oppose merging; I will do a little legwork and expand it, I just did a little... let some of the media catch up, the performance wasn't even 24 hours ago yet. While I always strive to maintain a NPOV, I must point out the sheer quality of her performance... standing ovation from the judges, the entire crowd, after just the first vocal left her lips. TR3ap3R.inc (talk) 16:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- As you mentioned yourself, you're not looking at this from a NPOV. Her performance must have been amazing, but that doesn't mean she deserves her own article in an encyclopedia. That would mean deleting it if she messes up her song one day. Antivenin 16:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Speedy Keep, Speedy Closedouble !vote struck Terrillja talk I added enough QUALITY references to satisfy notability. R3ap3R.inc (talk) 16:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Speedy keep is NOT applicable here. There are enough people !voting for delete. Antivenin 16:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Also, please refrain from !voting twice. Antivenin 16:31, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- they voted when it was a one sentence stub; read the reasoning. R3ap3R.inc (talk) 17:41, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Also, over 50,000 Ghits for Susan Boyle in the past 30 days. R3ap3R.inc (talk) 18:13, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Added a ton more refs and related pages, including The Herald, Reddit, and CNET (news.com) R3ap3R.inc (talk) 18:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Also, over 50,000 Ghits for Susan Boyle in the past 30 days. R3ap3R.inc (talk) 18:13, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- they voted when it was a one sentence stub; read the reasoning. R3ap3R.inc (talk) 17:41, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. I'm counting at least four dozen stories from a number of reliable sources on Google News primarily discussing the subject of this article. It seems her notability is not dependent on the show itself, which would rule out merging the singer's article into the show's article. Notability may not be temporary, but our ability to distinguish notability may be temporarily clouded, so I say keep for now, subject to review once her "long-term" notability is clearer. user:j (aka justen) 19:14, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- At the moment its BLP1E as far as I can tell. Until she wins or finishes in the runner-up spot in the competition, this should be deleted. D.M.N. (talk) 19:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Even if she loses next round right away, she will have at least as much notability as Gary Brolsma. — Preceding unsigned comment added by R3ap3R.inc (talk • contribs) 19:28, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- I'm having trouble squaring that policy with people on this list. --\/\/slack (talk) 21:07, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Um, she has had one audition, she is no where near the final shows on TV, hence why BLP1E applies. D.M.N. (talk) 07:44, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- At the risk of being contrary, I don't think this coverage is based on an event (otherwise she would be no more notable than any of the myriad of bad singers who audition for any of those shows). And I hate to pull out an other stuff, but William Hung, anyone? But, in any event, I see no need to rush through a delete. I believe she is notable at this point, but it will be easier to distinguish whether that notability is tied to a single event or not in the near future. user:j (aka justen) 19:47, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- This makes sense. --\/\/slack (talk) 21:09, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- At the moment its BLP1E as far as I can tell. Until she wins or finishes in the runner-up spot in the competition, this should be deleted. D.M.N. (talk) 19:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Snow keep Anybody familiar with the story of Paul Potts would understand why this person is extremely notable. Looie496 (talk) 20:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- What's a Snow keep? R3ap3R.inc (talk) 20:47, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Boyle is merely someone who auditioned, Potts won the competition. Bit of a difference. D.M.N. (talk) 20:48, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, but there are millions of Britons who are already thinking of her as the next Paul Potts. If her article were deleted, there would be no end to the howls of outrage. Looie496 (talk) 20:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Boyle is merely someone who auditioned, Potts won the competition. Bit of a difference. D.M.N. (talk) 20:48, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- procedural keep No real opinion on this, but clearly deletion should be off the table. There is an obvious redirect target if people are worried about BLP1E so this doesn't really belong at AfD. This isn't AfR. Hobit (talk) 23:10, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Keep - DO NOT DELETE THIS --If wikipedia is ever to have any credibility as a source for the people as opposed to stuffy academia, this entry totally belongs to be here. She has already touched thousands, and the ball is rolling, even if she by some fluke shouldn't win there will be records and concerts in her future, the word is already spreading like wildfire across twitter,facebook, email and even word of mouth on the street. Today the UK, tomorrow the world. I don't care what Misplaced Pages guideline might support the deletion, then that guideline should be removed. --IceHunter (talk) 00:31, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Keep She is no longer "just another auditionee" on a talent show. She has accomplished something that is newsworthy on a worldwide scale, more so than many contestants from the past who may have gone farther in the contest. This is not about how she's doing on the awards program. It is about the cultural significance of her performance, which will be remembered long after this particular round of the show has passed, regardless of the final results. If nothing else, she is a YouTube phenomenon, similar to Gary Brolsma (who's Misplaced Pages entry is not in danger of deletion). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimvanm (talk • contribs) 02:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep for now May end up being a flash-in-the-pan, but deletion now would be premature. Plenty of third-party coverage, much more than for your typical contestant in a show like this. OhNoitsJamie 04:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- More Info: As of the end of 12 April 2009, the YouTube video was the single most viewed video of the day, the single most favorited video of the day, and one of the highest rated videos of the day. The submitter was awarded the most subscribtions of the day as well. See also the updated infobox following thisR3ap3R.inc (talk) 04:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Honors for this video (101)
- 1 - Most Discussed (Today) - United Kingdom
- 4 - Most Discussed (Today)
- 1 - Most Discussed (Today) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 1 - Most Discussed (Today) - Entertainment
- 13 - Most Discussed (This Week) - United Kingdom
- 5 - Most Discussed (This Week) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 58 - Most Discussed (This Week) - Entertainment
- 82 - Most Discussed (This Month) - United Kingdom
- 16 - Most Discussed (This Month) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 8 - Most Responded (Today) - United Kingdom
- 52 - Most Responded (Today)
- 2 - Most Responded (Today) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 9 - Most Responded (Today) - Entertainment
- 38 - Most Responded (This Week) - United Kingdom
- 9 - Most Responded (This Week) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 58 - Most Responded (This Week) - Entertainment
- 13 - Most Viewed (Today) - Germany
- 2 - Most Viewed (Today) - Australia
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Canada
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - United Kingdom
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Ireland
- 30 - Most Viewed (Today) - India
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - New Zealand
- 6 - Most Viewed (Today) - Israel
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today)
- 8 - Most Viewed (Today) - Spain
- 29 - Most Viewed (Today) - Mexico
- 12 - Most Viewed (Today) - France
- 36 - Most Viewed (Today) - South Korea
- 3 - Most Viewed (Today) - Netherlands
- 12 - Most Viewed (Today) - Poland
- 47 - Most Viewed (Today) - Brazil
- 69 - Most Viewed (Today) - Russia
- 3 - Most Viewed (Today) - Hong Kong
- 4 - Most Viewed (Today) - Czech Republic
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Sweden
- 2 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Germany
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Australia
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Canada
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Ireland
- 44 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - India
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - New Zealand
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Israel
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Spain
- 4 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Mexico
- 3 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - France
- 9 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Italy
- 60 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Japan
- 21 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - South Korea
- 2 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Netherlands
- 4 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Poland
- 17 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Brazil
- 12 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Russia
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Hong Kong
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Czech Republic
- 1 - Most Viewed (Today) - Entertainment - Sweden
- 32 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Australia
- 63 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Canada
- 1 - Most Viewed (This Week) - United Kingdom
- 5 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Ireland
- 24 - Most Viewed (This Week) - New Zealand
- 11 - Most Viewed (This Week)
- 42 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Netherlands
- 2 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Sweden
- 68 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Germany
- 5 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Australia
- 7 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Canada
- 1 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 3 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Ireland
- 10 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - New Zealand
- 24 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Israel
- 3 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment
- 99 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Spain
- 52 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - France
- 6 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Netherlands
- 47 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Poland
- 23 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Czech Republic
- 1 - Most Viewed (This Week) - Entertainment - Sweden
- 1 - Top Favorited (Today) - United Kingdom
- 1 - Top Favorited (Today)
- 1 - Top Favorited (Today) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 1 - Top Favorited (Today) - Entertainment
- 3 - Top Favorited (This Week) - United Kingdom
- 85 - Top Favorited (This Week)
- 1 - Top Favorited (This Week) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 10 - Top Favorited (This Week) - Entertainment
- 44 - Top Favorited (This Month) - United Kingdom
- 6 - Top Favorited (This Month) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 97 - Top Favorited (This Month) - Entertainment
- 1 - Top Rated (Today) - United Kingdom
- 3 - Top Rated (Today)
- 1 - Top Rated (Today) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 1 - Top Rated (Today) - Entertainment
- 1 - Top Rated (This Week) - United Kingdom
- 13 - Top Rated (This Week)
- 1 - Top Rated (This Week) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- 7 - Top Rated (This Week) - Entertainment
- 57 - Top Rated (This Month) - United Kingdom
- 7 - Top Rated (This Month) - Entertainment - United Kingdom
- I don't believe that, as an anonymous IP address, my vote counts in an AfD. If it does, I would vote keep. However, I'll note either way for the record that Misplaced Pages's notability policy for music states that " musician or ensemble (note that this includes a singer ) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria Has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable." A search on Google News for articles where both the terms "Susan Boyle" and "Dreamed a Dream" are present result in 24 separate press mentions. Running a search for "Susan Boyle" and "Britain's Got Talent" yields 27 press mentions, some of which are separate from the first batch of results. Notability has, I daresay, been established multiple times as a result. On a separate note, I firmly believe Misplaced Pages has now overbalanced itself on the deletionist-inclusionist debate; where once it erred far too much on the inclusionist side (list of words Ewoks said in Return of the Jedi!), it now is far too deletionist, to a point where these constant acts of hairtrigger overdeletionism consistently make Misplaced Pages look rather foolish to the public eye. 207.181.228.210 (talk) 05:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Misplaced Pages will always get torpedoed by everyone for one reason or another, either it's "look at this garbage they've got floating around, idiots" or "they're deleting WHAT!? Frigging wikinazis..". Doesn't mean that we don't need to keep tinkering with things, but there will never, ever be a balance which suits the vast majority. This is a group discussion initiated by one editor after all, on a project which houses millions of articles ministered by thousands of people, so if the world says "look at what Misplaced Pages's doing" they've misunderstood what's going on here from the outset. Someoneanother 23:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Delete WP:BLP1E. There's a precedent with British talent shows, at least, that we don't create biographies for contestants that aren't in the final Sceptre 05:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep per loads of independent sourcing. BLP1E should be applied to negative events, not positive ones....--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 05:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Obvious keep - Meets WP:N; WP:BLP1E doesn't apply because reliable sources are already writing biographical stories on the individual and so in that sense there's no real "event" to cover. The only remaining question is whether this individual should have her own article or whether it should be merged into the article of the series, but that's a stylistic question better answered in another discussion. Oren0 (talk) 06:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep - it belongs here because I looked for it here on Misplaced Pages.Bcameron54 (talk) 07:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- That does not justify keeping it. D.M.N. (talk) 11:41, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep - Although she is currently "only" a first-round (second-round) contestant, she will at least at this moment remain notable enough to warrant inclusion in the database. Many people who hear about her video in the media will refer to WP for more information on the subject. 92.108.16.46 (talk) 07:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Merge into Britain's Got Talent (series 3) which is bizarrely light on details for a typical reality show article. The problem is WP:Recentism, it's notable now and briefly but long-term, that's debatable. All the sources (excluding the non-reliable ones like YouTube and Digg) are really just discussing her audition, a classic WP:BLP1E situation. If she actually becomes famous on her own, then spin it off into a new article. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:30, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep (no, that's not a typo). 99% of contestants in reality shows don't warrant their own article, per WP:BLP1E, and third party coverage is usually limited to articles about the show and perhaps in their own towns' local papers, but not only has coverage on this one shot round the world, some of the coverage is starting to talk about Boyle in her own right (her life, where she lives etc.) Now, if she fails horribly in the competition proper then the information could be merged to the show article, but at the moment I believe it would be premature to do that. Call it WP:IAR. Black Kite 09:57, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep - not to mention the rapidly growing amount of media attention that this is gaining overseas. Susan Boyle has been covered in every major newscast on national television in Australia. If attention from another country, especially for a show called "Britain's got talent," doesn't assert notability, I don't know what does. --ClEeFy (talk) 13:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Week Keep - while I don't agree YouTube hits matter worth a hill of beans for notability, it does seem Boyle has received enough coverage in the media to edge over the requirements for WP:N and WP:BIO (though certainly not WP:ENTERTAINER. For now, keep, but do some SERIOUS clean up, as I was personally tempted to say speedy for copyvio as the bulk of the article is beyond excessive quotes from various papers above and beyond what is allowed in an article that size. The lead is also excessively gushy. WP:MOSBIO is down the hall, someone please apply it along with some basic good writing. If she turns out to be a 1E, no objections to a revisit in 6 months. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 13:26, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. — -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 13:26, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep - notablity is established by a number of publications in the first range media and by the popularity of the youtube piece Alex Bakharev (talk) 13:46, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep She just made the German news, which almost never happens with non-national TV show contestants. I just noticed this AfD because I was looking her up, which in itself is a degree of notability. – sgeureka 16:56, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Weak keep - lots of good sources show regular old notability. However, it could be a "not news" problem. Bearian (talk) 18:24, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Keep Notice is very premature. And as to notability: when someone makes the news in so many countries that can not be an issue. Pe1pbu (talk) 18:34, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Keep I am tired of all these speedy deletions. I found this article useful, it gave me much information, proven and news-worthy, about an event which has just happened. Where do you want a current event to be noted - in the Encyclopedia Britannica? --Akral (talk) 20:54, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- comment Wikinews wouldn't be a bad place to list a current event, actually....
- Comment - can't this just be snowballed now? In case not, strong keep per media coverage. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 21:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Keep I can't believe that we're even having this discussion. She's featured on several different news media sites—people are bound to wiki her name. Webbbbbbber (talk) 22:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Strong keep I wanted to read this article, as her story is on the front page of yahoo. Here in America! International notability. Royalbroil 22:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Strong keep - Same reason as RB. It's absolutely not at case of that above mentioned policy. Also, if you read further into the Yahoo! article, she's already been contacted by Sony BMG. Ceranllama chat post 23:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- VERY STRONG KEEP - This article NEEDS to be on wikipedia. Without it, wikipedia would be a terrible place! Please, please, please keep it! --Yankeesrj12 (talk) 23:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Delete (kidding) Keep This woman is already being discussed in non-tabloid papers, this is hardly wicked whispers in the gussets of a red-top's entertainment section. It is not usual for a participant to receive international coverage, it is extremely unlikely that she's suddenly going to vanish without a trace. Coverage of her is going to belong somewhere on Misplaced Pages, come hell or high Rickroll, so time will tell whether it's eventually merged or what, but deletion doesn't come into this. Someoneanother 23:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fritzpoll (talk) 12:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. Seriously kids. Three times? I saw the video after seeing the AfD discussion. This morning it's on Yahoo news and the video has over 2 million hits on YouTube. Give it up. She's notable. --Moni3 (talk) 13:00, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep per the general notability guideline. I'm surprised that this discussion has been relisted considering the overwhelming consensus that has already been established (maybe someone will continue relisting it until the "right" consensus is achieved?) Bradley0110 (talk) 13:03, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
- Snowball keep. Meets general notability. Substantial mention (entire articles on the subject) in dozens of major reliable sources. The article needs to evolve and will do so over time, and may ultimately end up with a focus on the performance and pop culture phenomenon rather than the bio. There is no policy or guideline against covering the subject of pop culture, television show episodes, viral videos / internet phenomena, etc. Wikidemon (talk) 13:16, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep Clearly meets our notability guideline, it's time to close this discussion. --J.Mundo (talk) 13:18, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Opened and un-relisted -- moved back to original location, as there were no grounds for a speedy keep. See recent discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for deletion#Proposal to change the length of deletion discussions to 7 days. WP:SNOW is not an invitation to ignore process.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep First there are enough WP:RS to cover this. Second, while perhaps a fairly gray area, I see the Idol show as one event, and the YouTube popularity as a different event (even though they are directly related). I think this meets our WP:N requirements. for those saying "at this time", I might add that notability is not temporary. I'm also not particularly fond of the way this was forum shopped at the help desk and village pump simply because someone didn't like the fact that consensus seems to be a keep. See: WP:NOTPAPER Also, YouTube is not being used as a "resource" to establish a contentious fact, but rather an indication that an event has occurred, which by wide-spread viewership, indicates a secondary event notability. — Ched : ? 15:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. Article has reliable sources, we've got plenty of room to host the article, notability though currently derived from a single event, is likely to grow considering the nature of the show, plus all the relisting for dubious procedural reasons is getting out of hand. Equendil Talk 16:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, I'd say it's the multiple dubious closes that are the problem, not the relistings. :-)--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:03, 14 April 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.