Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Gatehau


 * 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, no consensus. 1ne 02:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Joseph Gatehau


Included in the nomination are the following articles, for the same reason:

I don't think any of these people are notable outside of Australian Idol 2006, a music competition/reality television show. I know that WP:MUSIC says that people that have "won or placed in a major music competition" are notable enough for articles, but WP:MUSIC is a guideline. I originally merged these articles with the Australian Idol one when I split them, which was for this reason, but that got reverted so I put mergeto tags on all of the articles. Only one person supported that, so I'm taking the articles of people I don't think are notable to AfD. These articles listed in this nomination are of the people that according to the articles are known/notable only for their appearances on Australian Idol. Articles about people that have competed in such televised contests have been deleted or redirected to bigger relevant articles in the past. JDtalk 10:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom and tons of precedent. Non-notable reality TV rejects, crufty. MER-C 11:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep These talented singers are notible outside Idol. They should have a page here, like all other Idols from Australian Idol and international Idols. --Whats new? 11:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Australian Idol 2006 first, they still deserve some mention on the encyclopedia, but do not need their articles on their own. Being a Top 12 in the Australian Idol is something, but I don't see much notability outside Australian Idol. Some mention (a paragraph or two) about them in the Australian Idol 2006 will be good. A complete deletion will not benefit at all. Just a brief mention of them will be better than nothing. --Ter e nce Ong (C 13:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Make more listcruft and merge into List of contestants on Australian Idol 2006, excluding any that get or have a record deal. -- Chris speranza! chat edits  16:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep this verifiable information that at least some people are interested in. Merge if necessary. Trollderella 18:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom. Edison 18:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect the ones that are not notable outside the show to Australian Idol 2006. Keep the others. No need to delete. - Mgm|(talk) 19:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete per nom DXRAW 19:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep all - I think it's VERY pre-emptory, and quite ridiculous, to delete these articles straight after Australian Idol has finished. If earlier series are anything to go by, there are usually a couple of finalists that also become notable (in the case of Anthony Callea, possibly more notable than the Idol winner themselves!) - many of these earlier finalists have produced their own CDs and would easily now easily pass WP:MUSIC. You can't tell me that someone like Jessica Mauboy won't have a record contract and sell lots of CDs very soon (given that she had to record one in case she won the competition!) - record companies have usually snapped some of these people up, and they have sold well. And as a matter of fact, contra to what the nominator and MER-C claim, precedent for Idol finalists in other countries has KEPT most of them for some time, at least until it can be established that the person has become notable or not. For comparison, Season 1 of American Idol finalists all but one still have articles, and 6 of the top 12 on Season 1 of Australian Idol still have articles. I suggest we keep these for one year, and after that, if the people haven't appeared again or no longer notably fulfil WP:MUSIC, at least merge them into the Australian Idol article or an article as suggeested above by Chris. JROBBO 21:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep all sites due to the current popularity for all contestants, merge maybe. Mjohnsona 9:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - what may be nonnotable in the United States is most certainly notable in Australia, keeping in mind that a national tour and/or single release on a major label is sufficient for WP:MUSIC - and Australian Idol finalists do their tour, just as American Idol finalists do. B.Wind 00:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect as above. Eusebeus 01:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. I would have a look at nominating these people after six months once we can see who has gone on to bigger things and who is on the way to being yesterday's hero. On past experience from Australian Idol, there is at least one person other than the winner who enjoys some level of success. Capitalistroadster 01:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment that's not the appropriate way to deal with it. We don't keep articles because the subjects might become famous or notable.  We create articles after the subjects are famous or notable.  At the moment, they all (except for maybe the top three) fail our inclusion criteria.  In six months, if they have made more of themselves than a Warhol moment, then a proper article can be created.  These articles should never have been created in the first place, and only now that the show is complete is there any real argument for keeping any of them!  Xtifr tälk 15:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This is classic! First some retard tries to merge the articles, and now that he failed in taht debate, he tries to get them all deleted! only 1 failure agrees with you, give it up douchebag!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SilverNightFire (talk • contribs) 15:26, 28 November 2006  (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   -- Capitalistroadster 01:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep for now as per Capitalistroadster. I think a blanket nomination is premature given that the contest concluded less than 48 hours ago, and at least 2 of the contestants (Mauboy and Geyer) are prominently in the news in Australia and recording contracts appear to be in the works.  The others?  Who knows?  I would suggest looking at this again in 6 months, and merge anyone that's settled back into obscurity. That will be most of them, but for now they are reasonably high profile celebrities.  Certainly they are currently higher profile celebrities than many people whose legitimacy is not being questioned.  That'll change, and quickly,  but I think we should wait until it does.  The articles are crufty, and pretty dreadful, but that's another issue and not reason enough to delete.  Rossrs 07:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep them. They aren't really notable out of idol because idol 2006 only just finished! I mean, Dean Geyer has been signed with Sony BMG already apparently and Jessica Mauboy may be heard of after idol, seeing as she was runner up. Keep all of them I think, maybe if they don't have any notable things out of idol later on you should get rid of the ones that don't. It's too early now! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MandyJane123 (talk • contribs) 08:59, November 28, 2006  (UTC)
 * Keep for the moment - It's a bit soon to be blanket deleting. Even given my hatred for Australian Idol the articles still need to be kept for a while when they are out of the news and have done nothing else that is notable then I will fully support deletion. Firelement85 11:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep all, meet WP:MUSIC and WP:BIO. No reason to delete any of them, they meet basic standards. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, per most of the above! Ummm, why need to rush deletion? I don't see much point in deleting at all. RaNdOm26 12:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect all for now, unless any of those won or placed, and shame on whoever created those articles in the first place! We DON'T INCLUDE ARTICLES BECAUSE SOMEONE MIGHT BECOME FAMOUS/NOTABLE!  Let them get famous or notable first, and then start creating articles.  It is not "too soon after the show ended to delete these", it is too soon after the show started to have even created articles about individual contestants in the first place!  Xtifr tälk 14:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * In this case, they are famous/notable. "Might become" ended after the show started. --badlydrawnjeff talk 15:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * As a set, they are very-marginally-notable for their association with the show, which is why I said merge. None of them has yet established enough individual notability to justify a separate article yet.  (Unless you want to point out one that has established notability separate from the show already, in which case I will happily !vote to keep that one.)  Xtifr tälk 15:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No, individually they are. Please read WP:BIO for more information. --badlydrawnjeff talk 15:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I have read WP:BIO, thank you, and I see nothing there to suggest that losing game show/reality show contestants are notable. In fact, there is plenty of precedent to say that they are not, i.e. Kari Schmidt AfD, Bre Scullark AfD, Catie Anderson AfD, Sarah Dankleman AfD, Tiffany Richardson AfD, Jayla Rubinelli AfD, Brooke Staricha AfD, and many, many more.  Xtifr tälk 17:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * There's no such thing as precedent here. They meet the standard of "Notable television personalities" with various name recognition and coverage.  That's right in WP:BIO. --badlydrawnjeff talk 17:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Stong keep all - Keep for one year then decide what should be deleted Cervantes87 22:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC) — Cervantes87 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep all per Capitalistroadster. RFerreira 02:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep all per JROBBO. - Vicer 04:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * KEEP ALL, you do not know if they'll get a record deal or not and by deleting this is deleting all our hard work. You may need to add it back in future reference anyway. Shaggy9872004 09:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The point is that right now, they don't. Articles can be undeleted later, and if they are all merged, they can't be deleted anyway.  JDtalk 09:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Australian Idol 2006 as per Terence Ong. -- Howard  the   Duck  09:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep DEAN GEYER : He is most likely to have already signed a record deal with Sony/BMG. Sony's representative indicated this to the media prior to the announcement of Aus Idol winner. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.214.0.163 (talk • contribs) 10:35, November 29, 2006  (UTC)
 * Why are you going to delete a historical event like Australia Idol and the shows performers what really is the point. Australia is apart of the world. The articles on the singers is a good reference point for anyone wanting information on the show and the people that have appeared on the show.


 * Who decides what is culturally significant?


 * Who decides here what people may be interested in reading and wanting to read?
 * Why would anyone want to delete a cultural significant point in Australian TV and who decides what we want to read about as well?


 * The whole situation here latley has gone out of hand people nominating things for deletion and they don't have any idea what they are deciding what should be deleted.


 * As an Australian I find the articles historically significant in terms of "Australian Television" historical moments.


 * While I am here I know that people come here to find out informaiton on the artists of Australian Idol and a number of other TV shows - Pop Artists and recording labels.


 * So, can anyone tell me in academic terms why the material should be deleted? pipera


 * Merge to a list of all Australian Idol entrants according to the season they appeared in.--Tiberius47 13:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * They all appeared in the same one -- Australian Idol 2006. JDtalk 15:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Lavina Williams. Before Australian Idol, she was part of the New Zealand R&B group Ma-V-Elle. They released two albums, which surely qualifies her as notable as outside Australian Idol. Robyn 15:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep or be consequent and delete the American Idol contestants too. Rough 21:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep ALL - We should keep these articles as they do meet Wikipedia's standards and guidelines. Otherwise, if the articles are deleted, then the articles of other previous Idol contestants from the globe, such as American Idol and Pop Idol etc., that do not include the winner, should be deleted as well as they are in the same situation as this year's Australian Idol's contestants. By the way, who says that the remaining contestants bar Damien Leith will not play any significance in the future, such as Jessica Mauboy and Dean Geyer. The bottom line is, if you are going to delete the previous contestants' articles, consequently, all remaining contestants of previous Idol series from all over the world must be deleted too. Omghgomg 04:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge all, like we apparently do with Jeopardy! contestants. — CharlotteWebb 05:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Lavina Williams per RobynG, and conditional keep Jessica Mauboy as runner-up per reasons stated by Capitalroadster & JROBBO, it has been proven in many cases that runner-ups (such as Anthony Callea or Shannon Noll) or at least a top 6 finalist (such as Ricki-Lee Coulter) goes on to do something notable to meet WP:MUSIC guidelines later on. Neutral on the rest of the bunch unless if a clear consensus comes out for the losing reality tv stars contestants that hasnt done anything notable since their respective game shows ended --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 15:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per all above.Sharkface217 04:01, 2 December 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.