Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neleh Dennis (2nd nomination)

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 NO CONSENSUS. — JIP | Talk 10:02, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Neleh Dennis

This article was deleted after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neleh Dennis, and has been speedy deleted a few times as recreations. However these speedies were disputed and a request to undelete it was made, and it succeeded. This is a procedural AFD debate. Article is about a Survivor contestant, I am not entirely sure about the notability of such people so no vote from me. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:33, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - For being on hit national/international TV show for almost all of one season, which would qualify her if she had been an actress with comparable air time. She got a reasonable amount stories about her during her appearance, so there's ample independent sources available. --rob 08:51, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Neleh was not only a Survivor runner-up, she was a reporter for a Utah news station for several years. --JamesB3 09:10, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete reality show contestants are the equivalent of game-show contestants, and are not generally notable unless they achieve more fame later. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 09:46, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Being on a game show is hardly enough for notability. — JIP | Talk 10:04, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • We're not talking about being on the Price-is-right for 10 minutes. We're talking about almost an entire season of a hit prime-time TV show. Now, you're entitled to think that's minor, but please don't lump together different things. This is like being a lead actor of TV show for about the same time. We're not deciding if somebody should be notable, but if *others* have found them to be. This person was written about a fair bit, and followed. Perhaps you don't think they should have been, but they were. Hence, they are notable for our purposes. --rob 10:09, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
    • I was actually talking about the Survivor thing. Sorry for being unclear. I don't think being on Survivor is enough for notability either. — JIP | Talk 11:48, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
      • OK, thanks for clarifying. Can I ask which variant of notability you're using. Here's some different ones I've seen used around here (usually not explicitly stated). Does one of these fit you, or do you have a different approach:
        1. Notability means somebody is *worthy* of notice. You don't think she's worthy. Wikipedia shouldn't follow others, but decide for itself who is worthy and who is not. Since being a "survivor" doesn't require talent or substantial contribution to humanity, she's not worthy. By this logic, an unnoticed person worthy of notice is a better article than anybody unworthy, regardless how much attention has been paid.
        2. Notability means other respected authorities in the area have noticed her. She has been found notable by others, but they are not "respectable authorities", and don't count.
        3. Notability means she has been widely found to be worthy of notice, by many sources, and those sources include reliable sources of information which could make a verifiable article. Wikipedia must be a follower, and not a leader. By this, I think she qualifies. --rob 20:06, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I'm sure she's a nice person but she fails to meet my understanding of the recommended criteria for inclusion of biographies. Reality shows, in my opinion, are mere game shows and contestants are not automatically notable. Being one of the cast is a long way from being the "lead actor" of a TV show. The fact that she was a news reporter is also unpersuasive. Reporters are an important profession but no more deserving of an encyclopedia entry than any other profession. We would not, for example, argue that she would deserve an encyclopedia article if she had been a doctor for a few years. Rossami (talk) 13:33, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, survivor contestents and news reporters are in the public eye, unlike doctors. Kappa 14:29, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per Kappa Rossami. Sandstein 14:42, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • What? Kappa voted "keep" and you are saying "delete per Kappa"? Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:44, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • I was about to correct that, but you were faster; I meant delete as per Rossami.
    • Thanks. Sjakkalle (Check!) 15:04, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as much as I dislike the show its contestants do indeed have notability especially when the contestant in question is the Runner up in the competition. This person like Richard Hatch or Ken Jennings is considered newsworthy enough that national news would respond if something happened to her and that seems a valid establishment of notability to me.
• Keep, despite how boring Survivor is.Gateman1997 19:32, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as a non-entity whose 15 minutes are up. DV8 2XL 20:52, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per JamesB3, rob, and Kappa; this figure has been repeatedly televised to an audience of 5,000 or more and it is entirely conceivable that people may want to learn more about this person from Wikipedia. Hall Monitor 23:01, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep notable.  Grue  16:23, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Notable only to those who spend an inordinate amount of time watching television. Denni☯ 00:05, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per Rossami. -- Corvus 04:24, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Apparently, she was the runner-up on this show. Runners-up are notable enough for me. Xoloz 08:59, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
• keep please people who spend an inordinate amount of time watching television might want to learn more about this person here so erasing it does not make sense Yuckfoo 17:16, 24 October 2005 (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.