Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rose Setten

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. Tyrenius 17:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rose Setten

• delete. Unremarkable people or groups/vanity pages. Senordingdong 11:20, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:20, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - not notable except for her award. Not a speedy. MER-C 13:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. She seems to me to qualify under WP:BIO in that she has a significant award (such things are not given to all and sundry) and that the limited results for google link to specialised sites and press, many to do with hwer status as award winner, with articles which are themsleves notable. That she is young and nothing much else can be said about her yet does not mean that she is not notable enough for us here. We have sufficient space for such people, surely? Fiddle Faddle 13:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Not really notable. One award doesn't make her notable in my book. Maybe if she does something else...

  LOCALZUK talk

  14:53, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Not that I feel strongly one way or the other about the individual (never heard of her and not interested in her), but I do about the principle. Even if none of us have heard of her, if the article passes WP:BIO the article should stay. I see it passing it. Fiddle Faddle 15:15, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep. Winner of a major national competition, so probably worthy of an article. -- Necrothesp 16:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Fiddle Faddle makes a good point. It's a national award, and she won it. That's good enough for me. --Nishkid64 18:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. In addition to the prestige of winning a national competition, this is worthy of an article because it involves a sector of music that is limited and underrepresented on the web. Considering the amount of internet coverage received by pop music competitions (such as X-Factor), it seems only fair that a choral contest of this standard should be treated with the respect it deserves.--Teawithauntie 19:03, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Appears to satisfy WP:BIO. The award is an important and coveted one. Bit sexist, but what the heck. Ohconfucius 08:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete That no-one has yet created an article about the award itself, winning it shouldn't really be notable for us either. If the article had substance, then OK... but it is rather cruftish. Well done to her, and all, tho'. The JPS^{talk to me} 20:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
  • That reasoning (above) is fallacious. We do not need an article about an award to know that the award is notable. All we need to know is that the winner won the award. If we did not (yet) have an article about baseball we would still be able to tell that Babe Ruth was somehow notable for being reasonably good at it (I even know that as an Englishman with no interest in the sport). I do like your thoughts (below) about creation of an article about the award, and then creating a list of winners. Are you up for it? Fiddle Faddle 21:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Suggestion: Create the BBC Choirgirl... article, and merge into that. Perhaps a list of winners? The JPS^{talk to me} 20:30, 18 September 2006 (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.