Talk:Philippine Idol contestants
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Article reads like a press release or something from a teen magazine. Lectricky 22:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)lectricky
[edit] Redirect?
Why should this be a stub instead of a redirect? There are no sources, and no indication of coming anywhere close to meeting WP:BIO standards for inclusion. When and if this person does something noteworthy, she can have her own article. Friday (talk) 18:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- She's a reality show contestant. That should easily do the trick for notability. There's no reason whatsoever to turn this into a redirect. --badlydrawnjeff talk 18:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I see nothing in WP:BIO about "anyone who's ever been on television." Friday (talk) 18:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Not yet, no. Just because WP:BIO has yet to catch up to actual reality. Besides that, reality contestants should fall under "Notable actors and television personalities who have appeared in well-known films or television productions," definitely fall under "just because someone doesn't fall into one of these categories doesn't mean an article on the person should automatically be deleted," and there probably should be a reality television clause if people need it epxlicitly spelled out. --badlydrawnjeff talk 18:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Someone who's a notable actor or television personality is another matter entirely. This is just someone who was on a reality show. Have you actually looked at the articles on these contestants? They're not good. We're better off with a single, verifiable article on the show than lots of bad stubs. These individual articles won't tend to be good because the folks who write such stuff aren't interested in making proper articles. And there are few if any usable sources, so why would we want to keep this as a standalone article? Friday (talk) 19:03, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- So you know a lot about Phillippine media and publications? I have no problems with stubs, especially when they certainly can be expanded by the right editors. When you have a show watched by a large amount of the population, and with a public awareness factor even higher than that, they're certainly well-known television personalities. --badlydrawnjeff talk 19:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Stubs are for when an actual decent article could exist. These people were just flashes in the pan, unless/until they do something else after being on the show. I'm not saying they couldn't be mentioned in the main article, but pretending we can have proper bios on them is just insanity. If people really want to track every tiny detail of everything that's ever been on TV, they should make a seperate wiki for that purpose and have at it. Friday (talk) 15:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- If stubs are for when an actual decent article could exist, than this really isn't a problematic article at all. --badlydrawnjeff talk 15:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- Stubs are for when an actual decent article could exist. These people were just flashes in the pan, unless/until they do something else after being on the show. I'm not saying they couldn't be mentioned in the main article, but pretending we can have proper bios on them is just insanity. If people really want to track every tiny detail of everything that's ever been on TV, they should make a seperate wiki for that purpose and have at it. Friday (talk) 15:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- So you know a lot about Phillippine media and publications? I have no problems with stubs, especially when they certainly can be expanded by the right editors. When you have a show watched by a large amount of the population, and with a public awareness factor even higher than that, they're certainly well-known television personalities. --badlydrawnjeff talk 19:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Someone who's a notable actor or television personality is another matter entirely. This is just someone who was on a reality show. Have you actually looked at the articles on these contestants? They're not good. We're better off with a single, verifiable article on the show than lots of bad stubs. These individual articles won't tend to be good because the folks who write such stuff aren't interested in making proper articles. And there are few if any usable sources, so why would we want to keep this as a standalone article? Friday (talk) 19:03, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Not yet, no. Just because WP:BIO has yet to catch up to actual reality. Besides that, reality contestants should fall under "Notable actors and television personalities who have appeared in well-known films or television productions," definitely fall under "just because someone doesn't fall into one of these categories doesn't mean an article on the person should automatically be deleted," and there probably should be a reality television clause if people need it epxlicitly spelled out. --badlydrawnjeff talk 18:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I see nothing in WP:BIO about "anyone who's ever been on television." Friday (talk) 18:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] This isn't really helpful
This list could just as easily be an article with individual contestants. I'm not sure why this move was done, and I'm certainly not sure why it was done without further discussion. --badlydrawnjeff talk 20:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
- People can edit without needing prior approval. That said, putting a bunch of non-notable people together into one article doesn't make them significant. Friday (talk) 17:24, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- So maybe it's worth changing back. --badlydrawnjeff talk 22:00, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- I would think it's somewhat more manageable this way- contestants will come and go, and be added to (or, perhaps, removed from) this page. Those that become significant in their own right can be split off (some of them already are- perhaps prematurely IMO but it doesn't seem worth arguing about). Maybe the consolidated approach will get more overall eyeballs on this page which hopefully leads to better quality over time. Friday (talk) 22:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- I disagree. Why would they be removed? They don't cease once being contestents, and they're already significant. --badlydrawnjeff talk 23:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- I redirected this article and all of the contestant articles back to Philippine Idol. All of them are famous (probably C-list celebrities) (as of now) as Philippine Idol contestants, so there's no sense of making a separate article for them. Other reality TV contestants redirect to their respective programs/seasons. --Howard the Duck 02:17, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- I strongly disagree. This redirect makes absolutely no sense, as there's no information about these people. At least the list of contestants had the information people may look for readily available. --badlydrawnjeff talk 03:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- How about thew official website? IMHO, the information and the style it was written before redirection looks like copied verbatim from the official website. And other more "notable" reality contestants are redirected, like Orlaith McAllister of UK Big Brother, Flo Pesenti of the Amazing Race (she's part of the winning ream, FYI) and many more. --Howard the Duck 08:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- I strongly disagree. This redirect makes absolutely no sense, as there's no information about these people. At least the list of contestants had the information people may look for readily available. --badlydrawnjeff talk 03:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- I redirected this article and all of the contestant articles back to Philippine Idol. All of them are famous (probably C-list celebrities) (as of now) as Philippine Idol contestants, so there's no sense of making a separate article for them. Other reality TV contestants redirect to their respective programs/seasons. --Howard the Duck 02:17, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- I disagree. Why would they be removed? They don't cease once being contestents, and they're already significant. --badlydrawnjeff talk 23:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- I would think it's somewhat more manageable this way- contestants will come and go, and be added to (or, perhaps, removed from) this page. Those that become significant in their own right can be split off (some of them already are- perhaps prematurely IMO but it doesn't seem worth arguing about). Maybe the consolidated approach will get more overall eyeballs on this page which hopefully leads to better quality over time. Friday (talk) 22:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- So maybe it's worth changing back. --badlydrawnjeff talk 22:00, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- (Reindent) You see, these contestants aren't even that notable, the average Filipino may not know these people, because the television network (ABC) has a pretty bad reception in some areas, and doesn't have the publicity mileage as the two big networks (ABS-CBN and GMA Network). Furthermore, the TV program, despite being officially licensed, isn't a big hit at the ratings (the debut had a 7.0 rating, far from the debuts of ABS-CBN and GMA which goes by the average of 20-30%.
- I'd rather have a pretty Philippine Idol article, than several bad Philippine Idol contestants articles. --Howard the Duck 08:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'd rather have both, as they're notable on their own. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- How can they be notable on their own when their only exposure is this program? Its like saying Ashley Olsen is notable on her own, but as a matter of fact, she and her MK aren't; they're notable as twins, so we have Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen, not separate articles for the twins. Ergo, since these people are notable as contestants of Philippine Idol and nothing else, the info should be at the Philippine Idol article. Except for the winner, that is.
- I'm willing to allow the creation of separate articles if these people have become notable outside of Philippine Idol, like having a CD, a TV show (not his/her own, not as a group, etc.) --Howard the Duck 11:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- They should probably be split up, then. Thankfully, it doesn't matter what you'll "allow", but what a consensus might end up being. It seems like a bit of a deadlock right now, I'm hoping some other people will chime in. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'd rather have both, as they're notable on their own. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Creating stubs/articles
IMHO, an article can be created on individual contestants (even rejects/semifinalists) as long as
- The season's winner
- If the contestant becomes notable outside Philippine Idol, that is /she is out his/her shell.
Other than that, they should remain as redirects since they're notable as Philippine Idol, so ergo, the articles should be redirected to Philippine Idol. --Howard the Duck 08:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- IMO, the people on the shows, as finalists, are notable on their own. They meets the requisite part of WP:BIO, and should be included. WP:BIO being the general guideline for inclusion of people like this, I feel we should refer to that. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- If these were Americans like those on American Idol I wouldn't be merging/redirecting them, but consider this: would you expect a kid from Kirkland, Washington to research on Reymond Sajor?
- As for WP:BIO,
- Notable actors and television personalities who have appeared in well-known films or television productions. Notability can be determined by:
- Multiple features in popular culture publications such as Vogue, GQ, Elle, FHM or national newspapers. - I ahave yet to see single contestant on a cover of a national magazine, either they're on a group, or I don't see them.
- A large fan base, fan listing or "cult" following - No cult following on them, either.
- An independent biography - None yet.
- Name recognition - If a New Yorker can name me a contestant then that'll be good. Majority of the Filipinos can't watch the program because the signal is weak.
- Commercial endorsements - None yet.
- --Howard the Duck 12:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't have access to Aussie papers, but i'm sure they meet the first "multiple features" part, the second part (Idol traditionally has large fanbases, as do the rest of TV shows), the third (Idol has a website with bios independent of the contestants) and the fourth (yes, name recognition exists. We wouldn't remove a Filipino actor's bio, for example.) Easily. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, not all Idols are created equal. I rarely see them on the newsstand, nor I've seen manic fanbases (StarStruck did this on 2003, but it has tapered off a bit). And with ABC's weak signal I doubt if a great majority of Filipinos know them by heart. As for commercial endorsements, zero. --Howard the Duck 12:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- If you "rarely" see them on the newsstand, then you're kind of making my point. I'm not claiming any commercial endorsements, but it's not a question as to whether they meet the WP:BIO standard here. --badlydrawnjeff talk 13:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- As for newsstands, I was referring to the first criterion: Multiple features in popular culture publications such as Vogue, GQ, Elle, FHM or national newspapers. Zip. Except perhaps for the winner, recognition as a winner will be sure bet for notability for me, IMHO. --Howard the Duck 07:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- If you "rarely" see them on the newsstand, then you're kind of making my point. I'm not claiming any commercial endorsements, but it's not a question as to whether they meet the WP:BIO standard here. --badlydrawnjeff talk 13:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, not all Idols are created equal. I rarely see them on the newsstand, nor I've seen manic fanbases (StarStruck did this on 2003, but it has tapered off a bit). And with ABC's weak signal I doubt if a great majority of Filipinos know them by heart. As for commercial endorsements, zero. --Howard the Duck 12:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't have access to Aussie papers, but i'm sure they meet the first "multiple features" part, the second part (Idol traditionally has large fanbases, as do the rest of TV shows), the third (Idol has a website with bios independent of the contestants) and the fourth (yes, name recognition exists. We wouldn't remove a Filipino actor's bio, for example.) Easily. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Notable actors and television personalities who have appeared in well-known films or television productions. Notability can be determined by:
