Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susanne Manning

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. TigerShark (talk) 23:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Susanne Manning

Susanne Manning (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

nn "Idol" contestant Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 01:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. Much as I hate reality TV, it appears that she's actually notable: BBC, Sunday Mirror, Evening Post, Evening Post 2, Ananova, Sunday Mirror 2. That's just from a couple of searches on Google. Somebody who knows how to really search British newspaper Web sites could find plenty of sources to clean this article up. --JayHenry (talk) 05:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I can see she has a lot of trivial information published about her because she was a contestant on a TV show, but, I still think she fails WP:MUSIC and WP:BIO, but I guess we need some more voters. -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 05:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry but WP:MUSIC is very clear and easy to interpret. "It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable." I spent two minutes on Google and came up with 6 such sources. Trivial has a very narrow definition in the context of WP:MUSIC. Trivial: "such as newspaper articles that simply report performance dates or the publications of contact and booking details in directories." These articles do not fit into that category. WP:BLP1E, in this particular case, is not a reason to delete, but rather a reason to merge and redirect. Merge and redirect is not a discussion for AFD. --JayHenry (talk) 06:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:BLP1E. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - per JayHenry's sources. matt91486 (talk) 06:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep She appears to have had a career following the series. Brett Leaford (talk) 11:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

• c everyone has a "career" post-idol, but unless it's notable in itself it doesn't actually make them anymore either... zzz -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 12:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

• You're right, but she has had a career that is perhaps more notable than many of the other former contestants. Brett Leaford (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 13:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Weak Keep - An appearance on Idol doesn't make one notable, and her "post-career" section is merely a blurb in this whole article. However, the sources above can hopefully be used to clean this article up and take out a lot of the Idol cruft. Jauerback (talk) 17:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Redirect to Pop Idol. The sources posted by JayHenry don't show any notability outside of the show. ^anemone│_projectors 19:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Weak keep. She wouldn't be notable for her Pop Idol appearances alone, but her subsequent work as a BBC radio presenter is probably enough to pass notability - it's pretty marginal, though, and I can't say I'd mind a great deal if this article was deleted. Terraxos (talk) 23:33, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, as the references provided in the comment by JayHenry establish a presumption of Susanne Manning's notability per the general notability guideline. John254 23:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous, added refs do not provide any such thing, I challenge you to show me how! -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 01:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, to quote in relevant part from the general notability guideline:

A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

Thus, references to sufficient coverage of a topic in third-party reliable sources can establish a presumption of notability. John254 03:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, well thats all very good, but she doens't fit into Wikipedia:Notability (people), if you scroll down to "entertainers", you'll find she doesn't meet any of the criteria.

Furthermore, there is still the WP:BLP1E issue. -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 03:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Since Susanne Manning is notable per the basic criteria of Wikipedia:Notability (people), which essentially duplicates the general notability guideline, her alleged failure to meet the additional criteria for entertainers does not establish non-notability. Moreover, having satisfied the general notability guideline, Susanne Manning would be notable even if she failed Wikipedia:Notability (people) altogether. As for "the WP:BLP1E issue", there seems to be a consensus in this discussion that Susanne Manning is notable for her subsequent career, in addition to her appearance on Pop Idol. John254 04:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

No I think that the jury is quite divided re: whether a job at BBC makes her notable or not (read above), moreover I think that most people, if they actually looked at the media coverage thats been offered up as reference material would consider them trivial as a secondary source. -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 04:08, 14 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.