739:
multiple published references exist, (I am assuming this means even if they are because of one source of notability). However, this could make sense as a change to the notability guidelines for people... that they must have multiple sources of notability, not just multiple references to one source of notability. For example, mayors would pass this test not automatically, if the only articles about them are because they won the election; they would pass this test after they made their next decision that causes multiple articles to be published containing them as a subject. Again, this isn't part of the guideline yet, so my vote is staying as keep, but it makes much sense to require multiple sources of notability (almost amounting to prolonged notability) for inclusion in
Knowledge. I will introduce this in the discussion on the
268:
2,3, and 4 are press coverage from July 28-30 2005, that she was booted off the show for low vote totals, and certainly count as one good reference. Ref 5 is a press release from the
Canadian defense department listing 15 acts on a morale boosting tour, and she gets passing mention as part of one of the 15 groups. Ref 7 is only trivial coverage in a story about a skater, Elvis Stoiko, mentioning that he recorded a track with her for the album. She and 2 other contestants were put in an album, "Braided.". Did it make it big in Canadian pop charts? There is no evidence that it was a hit. There was talk they might go on a tour. Did they? No sign of it. So in summary she has the potential to be notable, but is not there yet. Most of the sources are not really solid ones, being press releases or trivial passing reference.
462:. It was my attempt at humor on a day that I did not get much sleep. I was trying to point out that just being on a TV reality show is not enough for notability to be established. FYI, I actually did work on an article with this title in my user page area. I just am not sure if I will keep it, since I have a quirky sense of humor that some folks do not get. If you want to check that page out, it is at
496:
independent of the person." (Most of these are not "trivial" articles about her.) And beyond that, it looks like she has minor references indicating possibly notable appearances outside of Idol too. So while most of the other similar articles about these contestents don't have sufficient verification of notability, this does and should be kept.
188:. It is not the flash in the pan fame for being a Canadian Idol that makes her notable -- it's the multiple, independent, reliable, published sources having her as a primary subject that make her notable. Notability is permanent and does not diminish if the frequency of publications decreases with time.
782:
Actually, I would suggest that outside of the local paper article on her, all of the coverage she has recieved is trivial, and incidental. The articles are about
Canadian Idol, she just happens to get mentioned for being that weeks loser. While it is poorly defined at present, I would suggest that
738:
Resolute, so, the difference is the Faison became notable individually when he attained multiple sources of notability? (Not sources like "media references", but sources like "tv show a", "news event b", "tabloid controversy c", etc). The current guidelines don't require this, they require only that
211:
Actually, I agree, but the notability guidelines don't consider our (your, ohconfucious's and my) reservations about this type of subject being included. We should propose some changes to the guideline. Since the topic of this conversation is changing, perhaps we should move this conversation out of
197:
I realise what you are saying, but considering the amount of publicity generated by the program itself, all those non-trivial sources must be taken with a pinch of salt. Ie, because the program and therefore contestants were being marketed as commodities for the duration of the show by corporations
752:
Even if you assume the only reason she has received independent published articles is due to her being on Idol, and even if you assume Idol is "just a game show", that still is enough to meet notability guidelines. Articles about people who are solely notable for being on a game show are allowed,
267:
The editors have at least added some references, but on examingthem the references do not make a strong case for notability. Her fame is as a failed
Canadian Idol contestant, and several of the references are press releases from the Canadian Idol site, which is arguably not independent. References
787:
would apply: just because she was in the news does not make her notable. I could find multiple, independent articles on every violent criminal in North
America, but that hardly makes them all notable. The problem here is that the hype and popularity of the Idol series of programs is creating
495:
article does. In fact, it seems to have multiple articles specifically about this person from different verifiable published sources. That alone would meet WP:BIO 's notability recommendation of "The person has been a primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is
171:
of notability, notability is most definately asserted, the article stating she was a canadian idol contestant (as I already said on your talk page). All that said, having flash in the pan fame for being on
Candadian idol (or any other "idol show") does not in my opinion make her notable.
706:
Faison is best known for Scrubs, yes, but he has also starred in several major movies and television shows. His notability is not tied to any one show. Leitao has zero notability outside of being a contestant on
Canadian Idol. What little information can be said about her belongs in
788:
unwarranted focus on individuals who otherwise wouldnt merit any kind of mention. There is no reason why these minute little bio's of singers that contain very little other than the songs they sang on the show can't be left in the season articles for foo Idol.
362:
I'm certain that the
Canadian Defense dept hires tens of thousands of contractors. By that logic, any article indicating the name of an individual or corporation which supplies the DoD would suggest notability. Surely that's pushing the boat out a long way?
757:, which is mainly to handle articles about people who are only notable for having been on a game show. Additional coverage outside of multiple published articles about her being on Idol is therefore icing on the cake and not actually mandatory.
616:
Yes, it is. It is a show where people compete for prizes. Textbook definition of a game show, no matter what misnomer is applied to the sub-genre. These people are not personalities, but contestants. No more notable than a loser on
672:
Very, however that doesn't address the point. Even you refer to the show when talking about the phenomenon, not the contestants. There is no evidence that Ashley Leitao has any notability separate from the show.
644:
The social and cultural impact of these individuals is virtually nil. You might argue that The Idol series of shows has had an impact, but that does not automatically transfer to every failed contestant.
446:
630:
That very much belittles the social and cultural impact these people have in relation to actual "game shows," as opposed to reality television, which is an entirely different beast. --
115:
198:
with a huge market reach, then to be dropped once they are off it I don't think they are still notable - will someone really care about her in 100 years time?
682:
There doesn't have to be. Her "notability" exists because of the show. She's "notable" on her own because of her achievements there. We wouldn't remove
147:
because I easily found multiple, independent, reliable published sources having the subject as their topic and have added these to the article.
711:, unless she establishes any kind of independant notability. She may do that with her band, but that would be crystal balling at this time.
449:, which is basically an article about a Survivor contestent that received a Keep AFD result recently after some otherwise heated debate.
341:
Ashley is not the focus of that article, but rather is simply mentioned as being there. This would be considered a trivial mention per
830:
281:
Completely agree that, of the 7 references, the two from CTV fail independence, two are "trivial mentions", 2 others are strictly of
88:
83:
247:
Failed game show contestants are not notable. The sources included in her bio do not establish her notability independant of the
92:
17:
754:
75:
376:
Actually, closer examination of the article, it appears that she does not even perform for the DOD. The paragraph is about
591:. It is weighted against contestants, and members of the audience who are plucked out to participate in the proceedings
851:
294:
36:
836:
810:
792:
761:
747:
733:
715:
701:
677:
667:
649:
639:
625:
609:
595:
572:
554:
545:
528:
512:
500:
479:
453:
440:
431:
402:
384:
367:
349:
333:
301:
272:
259:
233:
220:
206:
192:
180:
151:
138:
57:
850:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
708:
474:
463:
426:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
729:
697:
663:
635:
605:
568:
541:
398:
Yes, I included that reference not to establish notability, but to give a reference to her new music group.
436:
Question: I couldn't find the "so you were on ... idol" reference you mentioned. Where is it on that page?
825:
725:
693:
659:
631:
601:
564:
537:
459:
415:
319:
589:
actors and television personalities who have appeared in well-known films or television productions
509:
468:
420:
313:
Mainly due to the
Canadian defense dept. listing plus the others. It adds up to notability for me.
53:
688:
329:
79:
820:
491:
While most of the other related afds have no published articles included in their references,
229:
202:
176:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
592:
559:"elevision personalities who have appeared in well-known films or television productions."
381:
364:
298:
213:
135:
225:
Ok, if ONC agrees to having it there. Or it can be a sub-page of my talk page if you want.
314:
282:
525:
269:
252:
49:
789:
740:
712:
683:
674:
646:
622:
581:
551:
377:
346:
290:
286:
256:
248:
164:
123:
71:
63:
807:
758:
744:
497:
450:
437:
399:
226:
217:
199:
189:
173:
148:
129:
109:
784:
342:
251:
show. As such, her mention should be on that article only. If her band meets
521:
753:
provided they receive multiple published sources. Otherwise we wouldn't have
618:
380:, and merely talks about them together in 'Braided'. Trivial upon trivial.
160:
159:
I removed the speedy deletion template during a run on the backlog at
600:
It's assumed that said personalities - like these - are "notable." --
255:
at some point, then the article should be recreated, but not before.
134:
the tag outright. No noteworthy achievements since the show, AFAICT.
818:
I believe being in the top 12 of
Canadian Idol warrents notability.
844:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
550:
Where does it say that game show contestants meet WP:BIO again?
289:, so there is thus only one good reference. In short, she fails
447:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/J.P. Calderon (2nd nomination)
458:
The Insert Name Here bit was actually a link that pointed to
122:
The subject is a failed candidate in Canadian Idol who fails
686:'s article because his "notability" is tied directly to
293:. I would hesitate having even a line about her in the
105:
101:
97:
508:
Enough material to at least merit a small article. -
418:
She could get there some day, but is not there yet.
584:, I suggest you did it properly: it actually says "
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
520:as television fancruft. Everybody will have their
783:the "notability is not newsworthiness" caveat of
854:). No further edits should be made to this page.
212:the AfD as well, I've started a discussion on
8:
126:with no assertion of notability, although
416:So You Were On (Insert Name Here) Idol...
724:that it has to be. That's the point.--
720:Independent notaiblity is established,
285:interest, whereas national sources are
7:
536:, reality finalists meet WP:BIO. --
24:
132:, who opposed speedy by removing
445:Perhaps a better link would be
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
755:Category:Game show contestants
1:
837:19:36, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
610:02:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
596:02:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
58:01:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
811:19:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
793:19:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
762:17:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
748:17:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
734:16:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
716:16:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
702:16:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
678:15:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
668:15:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
650:15:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
640:15:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
626:15:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
573:14:43, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
555:14:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
546:12:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
529:01:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
513:00:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
501:23:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
480:22:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
454:23:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
441:19:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
432:19:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
403:02:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
385:03:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
368:03:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
350:20:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
334:18:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
302:03:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
273:17:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
260:05:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
234:04:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
221:04:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
207:04:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
193:04:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
181:04:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
152:03:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
139:03:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
580:: If you are to quote from
466:. Sorry for the confusion.
871:
128:this fact is disputed by
847:Please do not modify it.
709:Canadian Idol (Season 3)
464:User:Fundamentaldan/idol
32:Please do not modify it.
563:isn't a "game show." --
658:phenomenon are you? --
167:specifically says no
732:
700:
666:
654:How aware of the
638:
608:
571:
544:
331:
231:
204:
178:
862:
849:
833:
828:
823:
728:
696:
662:
634:
604:
567:
540:
330:
327:
326:
323:
317:
230:
203:
177:
113:
95:
34:
870:
869:
865:
864:
863:
861:
860:
859:
858:
852:deletion review
845:
831:
826:
821:
324:
321:
320:
315:
86:
70:
67:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
868:
866:
857:
856:
840:
839:
813:
801:
800:
799:
798:
797:
796:
795:
780:
779:
778:
777:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
768:
767:
766:
765:
764:
736:
726:badlydrawnjeff
694:badlydrawnjeff
660:badlydrawnjeff
632:badlydrawnjeff
614:
613:
612:
602:badlydrawnjeff
565:badlydrawnjeff
538:badlydrawnjeff
531:
515:
503:
486:
485:
484:
483:
482:
456:
408:
407:
406:
405:
392:
391:
390:
389:
388:
387:
371:
370:
355:
354:
353:
352:
307:
306:
305:
304:
276:
275:
262:
242:
241:
240:
239:
238:
237:
236:
209:
154:
120:
119:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
867:
855:
853:
848:
842:
841:
838:
835:
834:
829:
824:
817:
814:
812:
809:
806:per above. --
805:
802:
794:
791:
786:
781:
763:
760:
756:
751:
750:
749:
746:
745:Sancho McCann
742:
737:
735:
731:
727:
723:
719:
718:
717:
714:
710:
705:
704:
703:
699:
695:
691:
690:
685:
684:Donald Faison
681:
680:
679:
676:
671:
670:
669:
665:
661:
657:
653:
652:
651:
648:
643:
642:
641:
637:
633:
629:
628:
627:
624:
620:
615:
611:
607:
603:
599:
598:
597:
594:
590:
588:
583:
579:
576:
575:
574:
570:
566:
562:
558:
557:
556:
553:
549:
548:
547:
543:
539:
535:
532:
530:
527:
523:
519:
516:
514:
511:
507:
504:
502:
499:
494:
490:
487:
481:
478:
477:
473:
472:
471:
465:
461:
460:WP:NOTABILITY
457:
455:
452:
448:
444:
443:
442:
439:
438:Sancho McCann
435:
434:
433:
430:
429:
425:
424:
423:
417:
413:
410:
409:
404:
401:
400:Sancho McCann
397:
394:
393:
386:
383:
379:
378:Casey LeBlanc
375:
374:
373:
372:
369:
366:
361:
360:
359:
358:
357:
356:
351:
348:
344:
340:
337:
336:
335:
332:
328:
318:
312:
309:
308:
303:
300:
296:
292:
288:
284:
280:
279:
278:
277:
274:
271:
266:
263:
261:
258:
254:
250:
249:Canadian Idol
246:
243:
235:
232:
228:
224:
223:
222:
219:
218:Sancho McCann
216:'s talk page.
215:
210:
208:
205:
201:
196:
195:
194:
191:
190:Sancho McCann
187:
184:
183:
182:
179:
175:
170:
166:
162:
158:
155:
153:
150:
149:Sancho McCann
146:
143:
142:
141:
140:
137:
133:
131:
125:
117:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:Ashley Leitao
69:
68:
65:
64:Ashley Leitao
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
846:
843:
819:
815:
803:
721:
687:
655:
586:
585:
577:
560:
533:
524:eventually.
517:
505:
492:
488:
475:
469:
467:
427:
421:
419:
411:
395:
338:
310:
264:
244:
185:
168:
156:
144:
130:User:Viridae
127:
121:
45:
43:
31:
28:
593:Ohconfucius
470:Fundamental
422:Fundamental
382:Ohconfucius
365:Ohconfucius
299:Ohconfucius
265:Weak delete
214:Ohconfucius
136:Ohconfucius
822:S h a r k
522:15 minutes
506:Weak keep.
816:Weak Keep
619:Jeopardy!
526:NetOracle
311:Weak keep
297:article.
270:Inkpaduta
169:assertion
827:f a c e
790:Resolute
713:Resolute
675:Resolute
647:Resolute
623:Resolute
552:Resolute
347:Resolute
287:required
257:Resolute
116:View log
808:Djsasso
759:Dugwiki
587:Notable
578:Comment
498:Dugwiki
451:Dugwiki
396:Comment
339:Comment
295:Burnaby
253:WP:BAND
227:Viridae
200:Viridae
186:Comment
174:Viridae
161:CAT:CSD
89:protect
84:history
832:2 1 7
741:WP:BIO
689:Scrubs
582:WP:BIO
518:Delete
412:Delete
325:Jester
291:WP:BIO
245:Delete
165:CSD A7
157:Delete
124:WP:BIO
93:delete
50:bainer
510:Denny
283:local
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
804:Keep
785:WP:N
730:talk
698:talk
692:. --
664:talk
656:Idol
636:talk
606:talk
569:talk
561:Idol
542:talk
534:Keep
493:this
489:Keep
414:per
343:WP:N
322:SWAT
145:Keep
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
54:talk
48:. --
46:keep
722:not
476:Dan
428:Dan
114:– (
621:.
345:.
163:.
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
56:)
743:.
316:⇒
118:)
112:)
74:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.