Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edyta Sliwinska

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. W.marsh 16:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edyta Sliwinska

Edyta Sliwinska (discussion|history|protect|delete|undelete|logs|links)

This article was speedy deleted under CSD A7. A DRV consensus overturned, finding that a role on Dancing with the Stars constituted an assertion of notability. This matter is submitted to AfD for full consideration. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 16:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

• Keep A role on Dancing with the Stars seems notable enough, and I can see it being an article that people would find useful if expanded. --Falcorian ^(talk) 19:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Reality/Gameshow TV cruft. Awards too minor. No encyclopedic notability. Build a fan wiki or dance wiki on Wikia, but this content doesn't belong here Bwithh 23:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Xoloz's nomination is not entirely accurate. If this was simply a reality TV contestant, I wouldn't have suggested overturning at DRV. We have other (semi-)professional pseudosportspeople on WP. Professional dancers merit inclusion if they meet WP:BIO just like anyone else. Having said that, I'm not sure that Ms Sliwinska meets WP:BIO as I can't determine the importance of the competitions she won in 2001. I suspect we have WP:BIAS issues in terms of not having an appropriate degree of dance coverage, but that doesn't mean we should include people who don't meet the guidelines, it just means that it's harder to determine who does meet WP:BIO by having won notable awards in the field. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Bwithh. Valrith 13:03, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - notability is a bit marginal but the article could be cleaned up. I prefer to err on the side of inclusion. --Doc Tropics ^{Message in a bottle} 00:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - She is a professional ballroom dancer who many people would like to find out more information about. Ballroom dancing is becoming increasingly popular, and not just because of ABC. I'd like to know when she was born and where. I think that learning about these people increases awareness of ballroom dancing, and will lead people to click-through to other Wikipedia pages, and that's important, too!!! The more people stay on the site, the better. Something like "Dancing with the Stars" and their dancers lead Wiki users to click other pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.254.115.93 (talk • contribs) .
• Keep - She is a professional ballroom dancer who has captivated the audience here in the USA and around the world. why delete this enrty? we need to talk about talented people like Edyta. best of luck to this young woman. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Michael juliejulie (talk • contribs) .
• Keep She's been on all 3 Dancing with the Stars. People want to find out about her.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 131.216.10.194 (talk • contribs).
• Keep - Notable person on a very popular show. Other dancers on the show have articles. -- Jeff3000 01:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
• Where are the multiple independent reliable sources? —Centrx→talk • 03:02, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - Here's a couple ABC Network, TV.com, Dancevision.com, msnbc. -- Jeff3000 03:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - Judging by WP:BIO: the first and third links are not really independant sources, falling under "Media reprints of the person's autobiography"; the second link isn't exactly "non-trivial", being mere database entry like IMDb; and the fourth link doesn't provide more than a brief, anecdotal mention of Sliwinska in passing. Dancter 05:38, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment - While the third link could be a media reprint, the first is definitely not. It is a season by season account of her activities on a major US network show. That she's been mentioned in a news station's (MSNBC) article along with a boatload of other place ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], each of which could be trivial by themselves) in connection with the show is important. The show is clearly notable with it garnering top ratings for its timeslot, and she's been a major participant in all three years. -- Jeff3000 14:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
        • Comment - With respect to the ABC link, I'm not seeing the distinction. The content of the page is almost identical to the bio on Sliwinska's official website. The only real difference is the addition of her Dancing with the Stars scores, which for the most part is already incorporated into the Dancing with the Stars article. As for the other links, a wealth of trivial mentions does not equate to substantive coverage. Just because the show is notable does not mean that Sliwinska is automatically notable by association, even if she's been with the show all three seasons. Notability is not the same thing as importance. Case in point: Karina Smirnoff has only been on the show for one season, but her notability has been established through references to several non-trivial works. Dancter 06:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep for her role on a popular television series. —Brim 15:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Of course she should be in Wikipedia. I came to the site seeking information about the contestants. Wikipedia offers an infinite amount of shelf-space for articles. Why be a snob? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.92.34.166 (talk • contribs) 04:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep - As long as the article can be maintained according to content policy, it doesn't hurt the readership much to have it. While it's probably going to be stuck in stubsville for a while due to the notability problem, and will likely be a magnet for fancruft and spam, that's nothing we don't deal with already. There'll probably be enough good editors watching it to keep the article in decent condition. Dancter 06:24, 16 November 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.