392:--he went up against a lot of tough competition over several difficult tournaments. This alone should make him notable, but I notice you also ignored my other points. You're simply interested in focusing on one thing--"delete all game show winners from Knowledge"--and that's sufficient justification for you. It's a little tiring to keep up with all your nominations and it's basically unfair because it monopolizes the time of all who would challenge your determinations in order to keep the content around.
442:, etc.). I have made no statement claiming that all game show winners are non-notable, and to categorize my efforts as that "is absurd". The AFDs I have started recently include similar arguments that simply becoming a champion on a game show does not make someone notable enough to warrant an article here. There have been hundreds of game shows with tens of thousands of contestants.
534:- I've been in favor of deleting every single Jeopardy Winner Trivia Page up till now — but Rutter's status as THE top winner (along with extensive secondary coverage) puts him in another category, I would argue. Then again, if consensus was to make this go page go away, it wouldn't bother me a whit. —
369:–Every person who has hosted a television show does not meet notability guidelines. Subject has not had significant roles in..television shows...does not have a large fan base or a significant "cult" following, has not made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment, etc.
406:
Sottolacqua, I'm a major deletionist, but that deletes 95% of television biographies if you only keep those who "made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment." Rutter is clealy notable, and your comparisons fail to stand up. I've made some broad notability assumptions
472:
record holders probably don't meet notability standards either, the one-day record in combination with additional notable achievements results in a compound argument for notability which you seem to have only been attempting to attack by dissecting each factor rather than attacking the figure's
719:. Rutter's had published notability for multiple separate achievements: the Million Dollar Masters Tournament, the Ultimate Tournament of Champions, Grand Slam, his Pennsylvania quiz show, and possibly his initial Tournament of Champions win. The BLP1E claim here is simply false.
467:
winnings record holder, and also was at one point the all-time highest
American game show winnings record holder. Either of these would be sufficient to sustain notability provided that they were backed up by some press, which is no problem in Rutter's case. While certain one-day
702:. No reason for each person to have his or her own article, based on my brief review of the evidence, but these appear to have non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable sources. Thus, if merged into a list, there's a clear potential for an FLC to come out of this.
256:
202:
387:
You're simply fabricating rationalizations for being deletionist. This is a figure of notability. He held the record for winning more money on
American TV than anyone. And he didn't do it in a one-off gig like
620:
several times over a span of several years, and received media attention at several points during that run. I don't see how this is a BLP1E issue. Plus, I think it's natural for readers to be curious about the
162:
251:
197:
230:
117:
648:
156:
562:
demonstrated by significant coverage in independent reliable sources given in article (and which can be readily found for a record-holder). Rutter's appearance on
674:
237:
282:"It's a game show. It has winners. There are other game shows. They have winners. I don't think we need a directory of every successful game show contestant."
279:"Winning...on a game show does not strike me as meeting the threshold for notability, even if it leads to a couple of additional appearances down the road."
209:
244:
418:
I've not stated that every game show winner is non-notable. There are several game show winner/contestant articles that are clearly notable subjects (
223:
216:
463:
I would tend to agree. However, that was not the case with Rutter, who was never a one-day winnings record holder. He was and remains the all-time
324:
was highly publicized and that voluminous outside treatment should be enough to establish notability. Fourth, even if Rutter had never been on
699:
264:
Although the person received media coverage at the time of their appearance on a game show, there is no notability beyond the single event.
122:
90:
85:
17:
94:
444:
Holding a one-day winnings record (that was later exceeded) on any given game show is not criteria that proves notability.
177:
503:
contestant who wasn't their friend or relative (without doing a Google search)? You can't lump all game shows together.
144:
77:
314:. First, this is not a Recentism issue. Second, Brad still holds the record for biggest total money winnings on
767:
749:
36:
766:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
138:
453:
377:
366:
300:
134:
752:
728:
711:
689:
663:
638:
608:
587:
550:
520:
490:
458:
413:
401:
382:
341:
305:
59:
742:
486:
397:
337:
724:
604:
265:
184:
170:
275:
Nomination follows reasons listed in other similar deletion discussions, including the following:
707:
634:
580:
516:
328:
he would still probably qualify as a minor
Pennsylvania television celebrity for his hosting of
685:
659:
419:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
268:
is factor, as there has been little/no coverage since the initial appearance on a game show.
81:
567:
482:
393:
333:
269:
320:
For that achievement alone he is notable. Third, a quick Google shows that his win over
150:
720:
600:
439:
427:
353:
game show does not prove notability. There are not articles for the biggest winners on
55:
737:
703:
626:
596:
574:
559:
545:
508:
474:
473:
notability as a whole given all of the factors involved taken together (as with, say
435:
408:
292:
Article was nominated individually after initially being included in a bundeled AFD.
681:
655:
535:
478:
321:
285:"Winning or temporarily holding the winnings record do not establish notability."
111:
73:
65:
431:
423:
698:
multiple contestants who have no other coverage into a list article, such as
499:
Just out of curiosity, can anyone in this discussion actually name a single
316:
50:
257:
Articles for deletion/Roger Craig (Jeopardy! contestant) (2nd nomination)
203:
Articles for deletion/Roger Craig (Jeopardy! contestant) (2nd nomination)
365:, etc. because this is not criteria that alone proves notability.
760:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
544:
As the highest TV winner ever, he is well-sourced and notable.
407:
too, but calling every game show winner non-notable is absurd.
252:
Articles for deletion/Roger Craig (Jeopardy! contestant)
198:
Articles for deletion/Roger Craig (Jeopardy! contestant)
107:
103:
99:
169:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
770:). No further edits should be made to this page.
649:list of Television-related deletion discussions
231:Articles for deletion/Kim Hunt (2nd nomination)
740:for coverage over a wide firld of endeavours.
183:
8:
507:has a different sort of cultural resonance.
675:list of People-related deletion discussions
288:"Clearly a figure of transient notability."
669:
643:
566:also seems to me to be a second event, so
673:: This debate has been included in the
647:: This debate has been included in the
249:
242:
235:
228:
221:
214:
207:
195:
700:List of notable Jeopardy! contestants
7:
238:Articles for deletion/Bernie Cullen
194:
24:
210:Articles for deletion/Dan Blonsky
245:Articles for deletion/Ed Toutant
193:Earlier AfDs related to article:
349:–Biggest total money winner on
224:Articles for deletion/Bob House
217:Articles for deletion/Joe Trela
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
753:03:17, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
729:03:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
712:20:41, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
690:18:17, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
664:18:16, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
639:05:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
609:05:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
588:02:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
551:22:37, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
521:06:03, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
491:23:37, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
459:23:12, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
414:22:37, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
402:15:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
383:14:52, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
342:14:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
306:14:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
60:12:26, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
787:
625:biggest Jeopardy winner.
763:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
272:can also be applied.
570:doesn't apply here.
736:Not a BLP1E. Meets
616:Rutter appeared on
266:Knowledge:Recentism
44:The result was
692:
678:
666:
652:
420:Charles Van Doren
778:
765:
745:
679:
653:
630:
586:
583:
577:
548:
538:, Oct. 11, 2010.
512:
501:Wheel of Fortune
457:
449:
411:
381:
373:
355:Wheel of Fortune
304:
296:
188:
187:
173:
125:
115:
97:
34:
786:
785:
781:
780:
779:
777:
776:
775:
774:
768:deletion review
761:
743:
628:
581:
575:
571:
546:
510:
451:
447:
409:
375:
371:
298:
294:
262:
130:
121:
88:
72:
69:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
784:
782:
773:
772:
756:
755:
731:
714:
693:
667:
641:
611:
590:
553:
539:
528:
527:
526:
525:
524:
523:
497:
496:
495:
494:
493:
440:Charles Ingram
428:Joyce Brothers
404:
367:WP:ENTERTAINER
363:Price is Right
290:
289:
286:
283:
280:
261:
260:
259:
254:
248:
247:
241:
240:
234:
233:
227:
226:
220:
219:
213:
212:
206:
205:
200:
192:
191:
190:
127:
123:AfD statistics
68:
63:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
783:
771:
769:
764:
758:
757:
754:
751:
750:
747:
746:
739:
735:
732:
730:
726:
722:
718:
715:
713:
709:
705:
701:
697:
694:
691:
687:
683:
676:
672:
668:
665:
661:
657:
650:
646:
642:
640:
637:
636:
632:
624:
619:
615:
612:
610:
606:
602:
598:
594:
591:
589:
585:
584:
578:
569:
565:
561:
557:
554:
552:
549:
543:
540:
537:
533:
530:
529:
522:
519:
518:
514:
506:
502:
498:
492:
488:
484:
480:
476:
475:Chuck Forrest
471:
466:
462:
461:
460:
455:
450:
445:
441:
437:
436:Larry Toffler
433:
429:
425:
421:
417:
416:
415:
412:
405:
403:
399:
395:
391:
386:
385:
384:
379:
374:
368:
364:
360:
356:
352:
348:
345:
344:
343:
339:
335:
331:
327:
323:
319:
318:
313:
310:
309:
308:
307:
302:
297:
287:
284:
281:
278:
277:
276:
273:
271:
267:
258:
255:
253:
250:
246:
243:
239:
236:
232:
229:
225:
222:
218:
215:
211:
208:
204:
201:
199:
196:
186:
182:
179:
176:
172:
168:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
136:
133:
132:Find sources:
128:
124:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
57:
53:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
762:
759:
748:
741:
733:
716:
695:
670:
644:
633:
622:
617:
613:
592:
572:
563:
555:
541:
531:
515:
504:
500:
479:Jerome Vered
469:
464:
446:
443:
389:
370:
362:
358:
354:
350:
346:
329:
325:
322:Ken Jennings
315:
311:
293:
291:
274:
263:
180:
174:
166:
159:
153:
147:
141:
131:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
573:RJaguar3 |
448:Sottolacqua
372:Sottolacqua
359:Family Feud
330:Inquizative
295:Sottolacqua
157:free images
74:Brad Rutter
66:Brad Rutter
595:. Passes
564:Grand Slam
483:Robert K S
432:Randy West
424:Marie Winn
394:Robert K S
334:Robert K S
721:271828182
682:• Gene93k
656:• Gene93k
601:Arxiloxos
532:Weak Keep
470:Jeopardy!
465:Jeopardy!
326:Jeopardy!
317:Jeopardy!
744:Schmidt,
704:Jclemens
623:all-time
618:Jeopardy
568:WP:BLP1E
547:Reywas92
505:Jeopardy
410:Reywas92
270:WP:BLP1E
118:View log
536:Carrite
347:Comment
163:WP refs
151:scholar
91:protect
86:history
738:WP:GNG
597:WP:GNG
560:WP:GNG
135:Google
95:delete
696:Merge
627:Zagal
509:Zagal
390:Wheel
178:JSTOR
139:books
112:views
104:watch
100:links
48:. --
16:<
734:Keep
725:talk
717:Keep
708:talk
686:talk
671:Note
660:talk
645:Note
614:Keep
605:talk
593:Keep
558:per
556:Keep
542:Keep
487:talk
454:talk
398:talk
378:talk
338:talk
312:Keep
301:talk
171:FENS
145:news
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
56:talk
51:Cirt
46:keep
680:--
654:--
635:^^^
599:.--
517:^^^
481:).
477:or
351:foo
185:TWL
120:•
116:– (
727:)
710:)
688:)
677:.
662:)
651:.
631:jo
607:)
579:|
513:jo
489:)
438:,
434:,
430:,
426:,
422:,
400:)
361:,
357:,
340:)
332:.
165:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
58:)
723:(
706:(
684:(
658:(
629:e
603:(
582:t
576:u
511:e
485:(
456:)
452:(
396:(
380:)
376:(
336:(
303:)
299:(
189:)
181:·
175:·
167:·
160:·
154:·
148:·
142:·
137:(
129:(
126:)
114:)
76:(
54:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.