Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charice Pempengco

From 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.

The result was keep. Sandstein (talk) 10:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Charice Pempengco

Charice Pempengco (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Unnotable musician. As per WP:MUSIC, this person's works doesn't merit a separate Wikipedia article. --Howard the Duck 11:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

In addition, it seems this girl is popular on YouTube and appeared on the Ellen DeGeneres Show twice. Although at first glance she could be notable, not everyone that is popular on YouTube gets a Wikipedia article, unless the person accomplished something else prior or after YouTube fame, such as Jessica Lee Rose of lonelygirl15 fame. As for Ellen, actually these talk shows often invite no-namers to guest and perform, and if Ellen or the host liked it, they'll come back (think of it as Jerry Springer's guests who want to face off one more time).
Ergo, her "popularity" in YouTube plus her appearances in Ellen doesn't alone make her notable; not of course if she releases an album and it sells well, which she hasn't. --Howard the Duck 11:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak delete per nom, but this certainly isn't an A7. Lacks third-party references and seems to fall short of meeting either WP:BIO or WP:MUSIC.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 13:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak delete per nom. Jonathan (talk • contribs • complain?) 16:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I think making the article at this time was rather premature, as she just started. So I agree with you in that respect. But since the article is already here, I'm thinking it should stay. Taking a look at Google news, there are 9 news articles about her with over 144,000 Google hits (I know it's not a valid reason, but I think it should partially count). I see her on Filipino TV almost everyday (saw her this morning when I woke up lol). And she's been on TV in Sweden and Korea. --Chris S. (talk) 20:41, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 06:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Regarding WP:NMG criterion #1 we should consider articles like this one and this one. I think this may be enough to say weak keep. --Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 07:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
    Replies to both Paul Erik and Chris S.: I've watched an entire day of December 30 programming of ABS-CBN and more than frequently they air her story - no surprise since she came from ABS-CBN program Little Big Star. I suppose she wasn't featured on GMA and other networks. Now if anyone receives as much "press" as Charice is that enough reason for her to have a Wikipedia article?
    Now for other articles such as the Asian Journal and the Philippine Daily Inquirer, I'd suspect they either chronicle her appearances on Ellen and/or press releases about her YouTube popularity. Again, if these articles does not say anything else, aside from these 2 events, does that make her notable? Lets say a similar person gets similar press coverage when he took an entire courthouse hostage, does that make the hostage-taker that notable that it warrants a creation of a Wikipedia article? --Howard the Duck 15:32, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
    You're referring to WP:BIO#People notable only for one event, which says: If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event, then a separate biography may be unwarranted. The reason I said "keep" was because it seemed to be a number of events, not just one: the appearance on Little Big Star, the success in Sweden and Korea (as mentioned in one of the articles), the YouTube popularity, and the Ellen appearance. If the media were reporting on each of these events in separate reports, she would certainly notable under WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC criterion #1. It's not clear to me that they were all reported on separately, hence my qualifier of "weak". --Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 17:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
    Little Big Star was a singing contest, naturally not everyone who sings there would be notable. As for Korea and Sweden, I personally find that to be hype, overhyped by ABS-CBN as a matter of fact. If I ask randomly someone from Stockholm if they knew of this girl and s/he says "yes", then I'm convinced. Her Ellen appearances aren't that big, and are again, hype; as I've said before, several people perform on these talk shows and even return but won't have their Wikipedia article. As for YouTube, I think Charice's popularity hasn't even reached the popularity of another Filipino internet celebrity Happyslip, at least Happyslip got into the NY Times.
    Charice may be "famous" for several events but she's not that notable yet for Wikipedia standards. Maybe if she has a hit album, then an article will be appropriate, but speculating that she'll be "big" won't be enough. --Howard the Duck 17:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
    We seem to be in agreement here. Being popular on YouTube does not make a person notable; appearing on a TV show does not make a person notable. I certainly would never argue that she is notable because "one day she'll be big", and frankly I'm perplexed as to why you would even bring that up. I was arguing "weak keep" because of her meeting criterion #1 of WP:MUSIC and because I am not convinced that WP:BIO#People notable only for one event applies. --Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 18:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
    Regarding criterion #1 of WP:MUSIC, it says on 1.1.3: "Works comprising merely trivial coverage, such as newspaper articles that simply report performance dates or the publications of contact and booking details in directories." On the Google News I've added earlier (see below), only one item fits the bill for criterion #1 with all of the exemptions, and it was about her YouTube popularity; either the rest deal with her on passing or fits the exemptions 1.1.1 and 1.1.2. Also, all except for the LA Times article are written in a showbiz fashion that makes you wonder if it's a press release or if the writer merely switched the words from the press release (statements such as "Filipina singing phenom, Charice Pempengco, left the studio audience of the Ellen DeGeneres Show breathless", "Charice Pempengco. Look how far this “Little Big Star” third placer has come. Last June, she flew to Sweden to record for Ten Songs Productions" (Ten Songs Productions is a red-link, w/c probably shows that her Swedish popularity isn't that big after all), "pamamagitan din ng YouTube unang pinahanga ni Charice Pempengco ang buong mundo (English: via YouTube did Charice Pempengco wow the entire world), etc.) --Howard the Duck 19:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
    I snooped around Google News and this is the result: 9 hits, all of them about her Ellen appearances and YouTube fame, 3 from the Inquirer, 2 from Asianjournal (they seem to chronicle Asian Americans a lot), 2 from ABS-CBN News, 1 from the Manila Bulletin newspaper (looks like Christmas wishes, "For Charice Pempengco to continue making her fellow Filipinos proud."), and 1 from the Los Angeles Times but only in passing: "a person billed as YouTube star Charice Pempengco." Her Korean and Swedish successes aren't cited in the article, although she had/will have a Korean trip since I saw it on ABS-CBN today. --Howard the Duck 18:34, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
    But the Korean and Swedish successes are cited in this article. --Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Gimme a Korean and Swedish news report and I'll believe the truthfulness of this "fame". --Howard the Duck 12:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Considering the media attention she gained in Asia (and beyond) , it is not hard to foresee that she will become an established and major singer in Asia in immediate future. Deleting the article now is shortsighted and is just complete waste of time because when she release album in few weeks time then we will have to start all over again. --Da Vynci (talk) 09:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
    That sure is a lot of media attention if you ask me... --Howard the Duck 10:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Even here in Korea she's well known by her two guestings on the nation's popular SBS Star King show where she was also chosen best 'foreign act' among the more than 50 foreign acts in 2007. I'd say rather keep than restart again in a few weeks. A search on naver.com (Korean search machine, worldwide 5th biggest search machine) comes up with quite some hits on mostly Korean Blogs. Considering the nature of Korean blogs, the popularity of Charice Pempengco is reflected in the number of entries in those blogs. Santoki (talk) 16:15, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
    • I think blogs won't qualify as reliable sources; with that said, the last time I looked at Google News, there were no Korean news items about Charice, only 8 Philippine and 1 American (albeit in passing). --Howard the Duck 16:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
      • I'm not taking blogs as a qualified source. I'm referring to the phenomena of the blogs in Korea which are these days being used by the industry to get user opinions on products. Also I'm not referring to English articles but to articles in Korean hangeul. This might not be relevant for this article, since it's in English. What I'm trying to show is that there is a relevance to Charice being recognized as an artist. Santoki (talk) 16:51, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
        • Actually blogs are everywhere, not just in Korea. For example, there would be blogs about several reality TV contestants, and most of the time, the mere presence of blog posts, or even blogs wholly dedicated to these people, aren't enough basis for having a Wikipedia article. For example, Ashley Ferl aka "Sanjaya Malakar's crying Girl" undoubtedly amassed lots of discussion in the blogosphere, and even if she did have her own article, it was subsequently deleted and was placed as a section in the American Idol (season 6) article. (Incidentally, Ashley Ferl was spoofed on the Ellen DeGeneres Show.)
        • P.S.: Does Google News include non-English news sources in English searches? I'd like to imagine several Korean news agencies may have English translations of their original Korean news pieces so I can fully investigate on the matter. --Howard the Duck 17:00, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
          • I had somewhere once a study on the Korean blogs as being different from their western counterparts. And why it was important for the industry. But I would have to dig in my archive to see if I can find it again. I don't think that Google News is including those non-English sources. It's a major problem for Google that it can't not index those sources that are indexed by Naver. Naver tries to keep foreign search -machines out which causes a major headache for Google. I meanwhile edited the article, added some stuff but I believe it needs more edit in order to fit also a NPOV. Santoki (talk) 17:22, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
            • Is there a way to search Korean news agencies a la Google News? If she has several number of hits, and they have English translations, they can be useful, but if they're all Korean I'd rather place this article on the Korean Wikipedia, that is if she's that notable enough for Koreans. As for blogs, unfortunately even if they're different from their Western counterparts, we can't still use them -- now if these Korean news agencies pick up something from the Korean blogosphere and publish it in English then Charice would be notable enough if there were like 20 news stories about her. As of now, in the English Google News, there are now 10 (additional one from the Inquirer). Now if you'd consider having an article in the English article where there were ten news stories, and not all of them even "legit", then we'd better create articles for several other people we've never heard off before, like Ashley Ferl who has 39 news stories. --Howard the Duck 17:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Since there's a rather active debate going on as to whether Charice deserves her own article, I'd rather vote for a merge to the main Little Big Star article. IMHO, it is too early to ascertain if she has deserved her own lasting fame much like Makisig Morales. A good parallel would be the American Idol contestants: normally, the winner ends up having his/her own article, and the other finalists get their own articles if and when their professional career took off many, many months (and even years) after the contest they were first known for. Case in point: in American Idol season 3, Carrie Underwood has her own page, and it took a while before the runners up such as Bo Bice and Constantine Maroulis had their own pages. For us in the Philippines, it's a bit too hard to verify and evaluate any sources (including blogs) about Charice from Korea since not many of us know Korean (though it's something that I'd also like to learn in the future). As for her appearance in the Ellen Degeneres Show, I guess Ellen also has many such guests everyday (it's a daily show), and I don't think even all of the guests have their own articles. For this reason, I couldn't vote on "delete", considering the precedent set in the American Idol articles. --- Tito Pao (talk) 05:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - the criteria is not whether we think she deserves an article yet, but rather WP:N, and with multiple independent coverage in newspapers, there are multiple independent sources (examples: [1], [2], [3]) writing about the her. -- Whpq (talk) 16:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
    • The problem is what's the threshold? 3 published stories? 10? 100? Currently there can only be 10 "valid" refs for this article, excluding blogs and other unreliable sources. --Howard the Duck 16:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
The threshold is "multiple", so I'd say 3 is certainly adequate. -- Whpq (talk) 16:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Isn't that too low a threshold? A lot of articles could've been un-deleted if we take the literal definition of "multiple" which is "more than one." My name was published in one newspaper, if I can find another one, then I can be on Wikipedia! Weeee --Howard the Duck 16:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
It's more than "mentioned". If you've been profiled in a couple of newspapers, then yes, maybe you should have an article. Wiki is not paper, so a low threshold for notability is fine so long as there are reliable sources with an emphasis on reliable. --- Whpq (talk) 16:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
If you will carefully scrutinize these news stories, it's the Asianjournal one that gives the most detail, although it is a Filipino-American media agency (ergo, not mainstream). The Philippine Daily Inquirer (a national newspaper) mentions her either in passing or via an article that looks like a press release, and as WP:MUSIC says, if the article is a "Media reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician/ensemble talks about themselves, and advertising for the musician/ensemble." then it's excluded from the "mentioned" and/or "profiled." As I've said before, several people may even have more than 50 news stories published about them, but they won't have a Wikipedia article. I don't see how this one fits the bill. On the ten possible legit references, only 2 can really be used in the article. Now if you're willing to write an article using 2 references then Wikipedia's going to the dustbins. --Howard the Duck 17:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, WP:MUSIC also says, 9. won or placed in a major music competition. Now, we can of course go and argue about what is major and what is not. Personally I would consider LBS a major music competition considering the fact that it was not only one TV show but a whole series thereof. WP:MUSIC is also just a "rough" guideline and not carved in stone. Personally I believe that having had so many performances on TV does count somewhat. I mean having an article about yourself in a newspaper is one thing, but the threshold to be on national TV is a pretty high one. Santoki (talk) 21:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
The Inquirer article does read like a press release written by a publicist, and knowing how entertainment sections go, it reads less of a news article. As for ABS-CBN, it has a penchant for trivializing minor events in the entertainment industry and passing it off as "news", even giving it more importance than the current events (anyone who has seen TV Patrol would understand what I mean). Personally, for the entertainment news, I'd be distrustful of both the Inquirer and ABS-CBN, more so with ABS since Charisse won in an ABS-CBN-sponsored contest (for instance, why was there no mention at all from ABS's rival GMA7? How many other Philippine newspapers other than the Inquirer reported this?) Had she not been in a televised contest such as LBS, I would have said "delete", but be that as it may, I'd still go for a merge, for the foregoing reasons. --- Tito Pao (talk) 22:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
You can find at least two articles on GMA News TV about Charice. They didn't really write it themselves but just copied it from the Philippine Entertainment Portal. But you can find at least something on this topic on their website... --- Santoki (talk) 01:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep - We have to wait for ample time for valid reasons such as an album to come up. Starczamora (talk) 14:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - Everyone keeps discussing how she's not "notable" in the US-- but what about the rest of the world, where she is? 65.3.169.55 (talk) 22:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
    • The notability for the rest of the world remains suspect. --Howard the Duck 03:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
      • Well, it is becuase you don't read any news from Asian media (e.g. in Korean languages) . You should stop using Google News as the sole indicator of popularity because it is an American company and may not provide first hand, accurate info on particular Asian subject. --Da Vynci (talk) 05:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Contributors should then provide information from Korean news articles about Pempengco. (I can't read Korean, so I can't help you with that.) Starczamora (talk) 06:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I used Google News for lots of non-American (mostly Filipino) subjects. Now if there's not enough English news media to establish notability for the English-speaking world (the Philippines is a English speaking country), then there's no chance for this to be a legit article. Even English versions of Korean stories. --Howard the Duck 08:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
But that does not mean we should reject news articles other than English as valid sources in English Wikipedia. Case in point, Asian Idol has an assortment of sources ranging from English to Indonesian to Vietnamese. Starczamora (talk) 08:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
No, but English sources are given more importance. And as long as anyone can translate from a language to English, there shouldn't be a problem, especially since there's enough English references for Asian Idol to stand alone. --Howard the Duck 08:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
However, there are information in Asian Idol that were sourced from non-English articles, such as SuperStar KZ's supposed participation and the partial results (both are in Indonesian) as well as Siu Black's participation as judge (which was written in Vietnamese). Also, following your argument, Vietnam Idol should also have been deleted since all of its sources are in Vietnamese. Starczamora (talk) 09:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I did say "Even English versions of Korean stories" so at least English transliterations can be barely accepted. --Howard the Duck 09:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
So basically you're saying that a person in a non-English country who becomes famous won't have a chance to get on Wikipedia solely because there are no sources available in English? This can't really be it, no? ---Santoki (talk) 11:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Sources in English are preferred in the English wikipedia, but not mandatory. See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English sources. Note that this is official policy, and not just a guideline. -- Whpq (talk) 12:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but an article where there can only be 10 legit refs? And I have yet to see a Korean, Swedish or Zambian news item about her. You people must be really that desperate to "save" articles... 10 legit refs? --Howard the Duck 12:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I have news articles in Korean. But since you can't read those I guess you won't accept those. And we're then again at circle one. Currently there are 7 hits if I give Charice's name in Korean into the search machine. --- 00:03, 5 January 2008 (UTC) (sorry, signed my post but it didn't show my name... Santoki (talk) 00:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC))
In addition I just found an article in French about a radio show on December 1st 2007 in Switzerland on vibration fm, a local radio in the canton of Valais or Wallis. -- Santoki (talk) 00:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I bet this is just like the LA Times article: "Works comprising merely trivial coverage, such as newspaper articles that simply report performance dates or the publications of contact and booking details in directories." --Howard the Duck 04:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
But do they end up the sole subject of an article? -- Whpq (talk) 13:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Clear keep Notable as you could hope for. Last article by Starczamora pushes it right over. Hobit (talk) 05:11, 6 January 2008 (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.