Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imogen Thomas


 * 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 redirected to Big Brother UK series 7. --Sam Blanning(talk) 16:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Imogen Thomas
Non notible Big Brother 7 housemate. -- 9cds(talk) 15:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 *  Delete and Merge Merge and Redirect with Big Brother UK series 7 as per the precendent for all other housemates in big brother in previous series. Even winners don't have articles. An article is only justified if they achieve notability once outside the house. Ydam 15:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * On a point of information, all winners except Anthony (BB6, 2005) appear to have articles. He was made Young People's Ambassador for Consett, so surely it must be a shoo-in? --Ross UK 19:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * You're right - I guess I should take a closer look at more than just the previous series. I should point out that the winners from series 1-3 became tv presenters in some capacity or another so I suppose they achieved notability outside the house. Still if this person goes on to win then they may deserve an article but until then they're NN Ydam 10:16, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. --Lord Deskana Dark Lord of the Sith 16:06, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 *  Delete and Merge Merge and Redirect with Big Brother UK series 7. Sweetie Petie 16:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and Merge with Big Brother UK series 7. Philc  TECI 16:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per above. However, note that a merged article cannot be deleted- it must become a redirect. -- Kicking222 16:49, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect because "delete and merge" is for some reason considered a violation of GFDL. --Metropolitan90 16:50, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 *  Delete and Merge and Redirect  is OK if the history is transferred as well. Tyrenius 17:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per above. Essexmutant 17:57, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - hardly noteworthy; this information can go on the Big Brother page is needed. Michaelritchie200 18:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per usual precedents. --Ross UK 18:40, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Question: this is Miss Wales 2003, correct? Should that not make her notable? HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 18:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The lack of an article even on Miss Wales seems to indicate not. Nice pic though. Tyrenius 18:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC) (article started after this post Tyrenius 14:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC))


 * Super Weak Keep as a former miss Wales. -- E ivindt@c 23:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect per Ydam. jgp 02:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep passes the numa numa test - is more notable than Numa Numa
 * Speedy redirect This comes up every year. Non-notable game show contestant. Redirect to series. Mrsteviec 08:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Orlaith McAllister of last year had a similar profile to her i.e beauty queen/celebrity gossip and she wasn't notable enough for her own article either. Her limited profile can go on the main BB2007 article. Mrsteviec 15:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect -- We do not have individual articles for individual contestants unless they are or become notable for other things. Precedents include 1 2 3 4 4 6 7 8 9 with Derek being kept because of extra, political activities. The JPS   talk to me  10:28, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect Trampikey 11:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - She was Miss Wales 2003 - Making her the most beautiful woman (i know not technically) in the whole of Wales that year, this is notable -- Thewikimonster 18:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, as the Miss Wales title makes her notable. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 21:27, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete does every former Miss Wales deserve their own entry? maybe merge into into main article Barbara Osgood 23:20, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * We have articles for about half the winners of Miss America so far, including some with no real claims of notability beyond the title (Marilyn Meseke, Yolande Betbeze, Evelyn Margaret Ay, etc.). There's also a succession box for the title. As such, the answer to your question would seem to be "yes", by precedent. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 00:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah well. I stand corrected I suppose... Barbara Osgood 01:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect - if the Miss Wales competition doesn't have its own article, then the winners shouldn't either, unless they do anything noteworthy. Going by the precedents of previous Big Brother contestants, this should be merged with Big Brother UK series 7 until such time as she is noteworthy in her own right.  Robwingfield (talk) 11:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * There was a Miss Wales article at the time you posted this, although it was admittedly rather small. I've gone ahead and expanded it a bit. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 14:38, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep on that basis. As long as this doesn't set a precedent for other BB articles.  I started this and a few other BB7 contestant articles, but in hindsight, that was perhaps wrong.  I now favour the approach of redirects to the BB7 article, unless the contestant is noteworthy for any other reason, such as Imogen for he Miss Wales victory. Robwingfield (talk) 15:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep change vote in the light of Miss Wales and Big Brother. Double whammy. Tyrenius 15:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, as she won the Miss Wales, so, she is notable. Carioca 16:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect - For the moment.... If she becomes really famous (like Jade) after or even during the time in the house, then we can create a new article for her — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.74.96.197 (talk • contribs)
 * Merge & Redirect - yep, create an article if she becomes notable in some other way. THE KING 04:32, 25 May 2006 (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.