Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lucky Octavian

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep or merge (no consensus to delete). Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:06, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lucky Octavian

Minor game show contestants are not encyclopedic. Google search turns up 108 results. Barfooz (talk) 03:50, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Not encyclopedic.--Absurdist 03:57, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Comment Why doesn't this rule apply to American Idol contestants as well? I see many articles about them. Revolución 04:45, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
  • American Idol is, I believe, the most watched TV show in America (Not a minor game show). Wikipedia has a definite American bias. That being said, if it was up to me, I'd only allow articles on the winners, or the runners-up who signed record deals. -- Barfooz (talk) 04:55, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
    • You mean the American bias which includes all of the Australian Idol and Pop Idols contestants? The American bias which includes Big Brother contestants from every country in the world? The American bias which puts the winner of the Eurovision song contest on the Main Page? RickK 05:10, May 23, 2005 (UTC)
      • It is estimated that there are 335.5 million native speakers of English. The 2000 US Census estimates 281 million United States citizens. It further states that 47 million of the respondents do not speak English at home, leaving some 234 million English speakers in the United States. Now I realize that speaking English at home is not an indication of native speakerhood, but the majority of those people are going to be native speakers. That's a big chunk of the English native speakers. Therefore, I would expect viewpoints on English Wikipedia to have an American bias, if only because a majority of the users are likely American. That said, this is completely irrelevant to Lucky Octavian. :) -- Barfooz (talk) 05:38, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, vanity, spam. — JIP | Talk 04:52, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
  • I don't think this constitutes either vanity or spam. This guy may be non-notable, but I doubt he or someone related to him created the article. Thus, it's not vanity. Revolución 05:05, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable. Megan1967 06:47, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

• Delete: The standard should apply to American Idol, Australian Idol, and all the other anglophone -Idol shows. Game show contestants and reality show participants are not notable until after their win and subsequent achievement. Geogre 11:37, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, or maybe merge somewhere. Let's try to avoid Anglophone systemic bias. If Geogre thinks all idol contestents should be deleted, he should try to get a consensus for that. Kappa 18:01, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Why can't game show finalists be notable? They count as celebrities nowadays, so surely that's a kind of notability? — P Ingerson (talk) 23:50, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Merge with Indonesian Idol; barring that, cleanup and keep. Christopher Parham (talk) 23:53, 2005 May 23 (UTC)
• Keep if we're keeping all the American Idolcruft. Ketsuban has spoken. The debate is over. 02:18, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
• Merge with Indonesian Idol. --metta, The Sunborn 04:02, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
• Merge as above. Vegaswikian 04:47, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete nn. Leanne 05:55, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non notable. JamesBurns 10:09, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.