Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grace Adams-Short

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 of the debate was REDIRECT. Although most editors proposed a delete, I am going to change it to a re-direct to Big Brother (UK series 7), per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Big_Brother#Precedents. TigerShark 18:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grace Adams-Short

Non notable Big Brother housemate, fancruft. I'd speedy it but I thought it would be better to bring it here just in case. — FireFox 18:02, 15 June '06

  • Delete per WP:BIO. PJM 18:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Budgiekiller 18:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep I cleaned up the article tremendously and she meets WP:BIO, with this[1] and this[2]. From WP:BIO, "Name recognition," and "The person has been the primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person." Yanksox (talk) 18:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Yanksox (talk) 11:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Comment: She is in Big Brother, so of course she is going to be in the news and all over the internet (on mostly Big Brother fan sites). This doesn't make her notable. — FireFox 18:13, 15 June '06
The news sources are not obliged to print a story about someone, they do so with their own free will. Yanksox (talk) 18:19, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
This still does not make the article meet WP:BIO. Even after your cleanup, the only notability the article claims is being a 20-year old dance teacher that's been on TV – not notable. — FireFox 18:24, 15 June '06
And she is not the primary subject of many of these external articles - Big Brother is. PJM 18:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
According to Wikiproject Big Brother she is notable, read this. Yanksox (talk) 18:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
"The person has been the primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person." – how is this applicable to Grace? — FireFox 18:24, 15 June '06
Did you click any one of the links that I supplied? Yanksox (talk) 18:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, which is why I am saying just because someone is in the news it doesn't make them notable. Big Brother is highly promoted on news sites and other fan sites, so her name is going to crop up here and there, but by no means does this mean she is notable. — FireFox 18:26, 15 June '06
We've been through this quite a few times. Grace is most definitely not notable enough for her own page, she's a gameshow contestant! Budgiekiller 18:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Notability is really an iffy thing. I am supplying the sources and supplying my rationale for why it should be kept. To be honest, I don't watch TV or really care about celebrity status (except for me :P). I have looked over the policy and in my mind it appears that she fits the profile. You can call this and I'll understand. Yanksox (talk) 18:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
(Edit conflict x2. Gah.) Well of course your opinion is all yours, I'm not trying to change your mind or anything. We'll see what everyone else has to say about it anyway :) — FireFox 18:32, 15 June '06
  • Delete - I was under the impression that there was agreement that BB contenstants only became noteable if they achieved something outside of the show. As she's still in there, this cannot apply. Ac@osr 18:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Yep, try this... Budgiekiller 18:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - I believe wikipedia allows 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, does it not? Cheekyweemunky 18:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete No evidence of sufficient notability. Regarding the news articles and fan/gossip websites offered above as supporting evidence for keeping the article, I would emphasize that "non-trivial" is a key word of the criteria. National newspapers typically carry much trivial content. Bwithh 18:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Since she hasn't done anything outside of the show, she's not notable. RedRollerskate 19:07, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, possible merge per RedRollerskate. - Kookykman|(t)e
  • Delete. As RedRollerskate said, she's not notable outside of the show. Extraordinary Machine 21:36, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Certainly doesn't need her own article. -- Necrothesp 21:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Evict from wikipedia. AfD:Who goes? You decide. -- GWO
Well done. ;) PJM 12:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Premium rate AfD phone numbers, anyone? -- 9cds(talk) 12:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete nothing encyclopedic left in article. del per nom. --Strothra 14:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Beyond the appearance on Big Brother, she is not notable at all. Perhaps a merge, but even that doesn't seem to be required.--Auger Martel 17:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete I just don't like her. And, the article looks about as useful as this comment.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.74.134 (talk • contribs)
  • Delete current content (initial unsourced version, and now substub) for failing WP:AFD, but keep if fixed by the end of AFD (or admin is asked to relist). I think its probably possible to write a new article to satisify WP:BIO, but nothing here (or the equally troubled gossipy/attackish content here) would help with that. Unfortunately, most BB bios created while the season is on-air, aren't worth keeping, because they are not encyclopedic (amounting to a personal recap, not an article based on sources). But most have potential for a valid encyclopedic articles. --Rob 23:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete her 15 minutes of fame will soon be over and she will be forgotten.Stephenjh 04:57, 20 June 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.