Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katherine St-Laurent


 * 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   delete. PeterSymonds (talk)  20:45, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Katherine St-Laurent

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I see that this article has been nominated for deletion.

I would simply note that:

(1) Katherine St-Laurent was one of the top 10 contestants on Canadian Idol, finishing in 9th. place. There are individual Wikipedia articles for all but one of the 9th. place finishers in previous years.

(2) There are individual Wikipedia articles for all of the top 10 contestants on American Idol.

Given the number of other articles for 9th. place contestants on the Idol shows, I see no reason for singling this article out for deletion, while retaining the other articles. This would be purely arbitrary, and inconsistent with previous practice. JD Fan (talk) 02:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

JD Fan, can you please add whether KEEP, REDIRECT or DELETE to this article for this AFD debate. --ApprenticeFan (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC) Keep--I think the article has a reliable source (CTV) and the subject's marginally notable.-- S Marshall Talk 07:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - user who actually nominated the article for deletion appears to be User:121.96.101.243 -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   — Cliff smith  talk  20:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete the usual benchmark for contestants is top 3, except if there are other reasons which enhance the individual's notability. 171 GHits. The CTV site is purely a promotional tool for the show, so if that is the best fellow editors can do, the subject lacks reliable independent sources and is thus not notable. Ohconfucius (talk) 08:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Ohconfucius, please note, you made a major error in your Google query. You used "-ctv.ca", when you mean "-site:ctv.ca" or maybe -"inurl:ctv.ca".  You wanted to exclude ctv as a source, but you actually removed all references to the text ctv.ca.  A similiar mistake with "youtube".  It's good to exclude the site with "-site:youtube.com", but you excluded references to it.  So, for instance, if a major newspaper mentions this person's "youtube" fans, your query excludes it.  If you had done a query to exclude these terms from the url, such as this, you'd see 12,000 hits, with the National Post doing a full story on her as the first result. --Rob (talk) 14:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment The actual practice for "Idol" contestants is top 10, not top 3, as evidenced by the Wikipedia articles for previous seasons for both Canadian Idol and American Idol.  Argument to keep this article is based on consistency with established practice for both Canadian and American Idol.  From a Canadian viewpoint, I would also add that the notability of the article is enhanced by the fact that Katherine St-Laurent was the top Canadian Idol contestant from Quebec this year, with good potential for building a career in Quebec subsequently.


 * As for sources, the CTV site is not just promotional, but also factual, particularly in the matters covered by the article, i.e., biographies of the singers and who sang what when. The site also has videos of the actual performances, along with the judges' comments, so you can see first-hand who sang what when and what the judges said about their performances. JD Fan (talk) 14:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Even if it is not promotional, the fact incontrovertible fact is that the station carries the program, and articles about it on their website are hardly independent of the subject, and are usually excluded. Ohconfucius (talk) 15:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per N. Unsourced detail for this article. --121.96.101.177 (talk) 14:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete: When she achieves significance outside of the candle flame of a reality show, she will fit.  Until then, delete.  Utgard Loki (talk) 16:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions.   — Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 23:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep References can be developed iteratively: if more need to be added, more can and will be added. If lack of references at the outset of an article were a reason for deletion, then we would have to delete large numbers of stub and start-class articles.  More references will be added shortly.  As for the comment about "the candle flame of a reality show", that is simply a point of view.  The key fact here is that millions of people watch these shows.  That's the reality.  The fact remains that we do have articles for the Top 10 Idol contestants in both Canada and the USA - and consistency should prevail. JD Fan (talk) 01:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BLP1E. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 01:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment – This might be a close call. I don't think the biography of her on CTV's website (the network on which Canadian Idol airs) can really be seen as an independent source. But there is this article in Toronto's edition of Metro, and this one from the National Post. There is this one from The Province. All those are independent sources, but I agree with brewcrewer that WP:BLP1E is a relevant policy to cite. For something non-Canadian Idol-related, there is an article from The Montreal Gazette (Jane Davenport, "Call out for a girl soprano: Young singers audition for lead role in Cirque's Quidam show", The Gazette, 2002-04-21, p. A3), which talks about her, at age 10, auditioning for a singing role in Cirque du Soleil. (I'm assuming that's the same Katherine St-Laurent, but am not certain.) Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 02:11, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 *  Keep  Thanks for the sources. Again, I return to the question of consistency.  If other Idol Top 10 articles are kept, then why not this one?  What kind of law or policy applies arbitrarily to some cases but not to others?  No policy can be administered in that fashion and still retain any legitimacy.  If this article is deleted, then delete all the other other Top 10 articles for Idol contestants who did not place in the Top 3 - for both Canada and the USA.JD Fan (talk) 03:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That is what is commonly known as 'other crap exists', and is again not a valid 'keep' argument. The other examples you cited may will be subject to deletion bids in the near future. For your information, the only season where many more than 3 have been retained appears to be season 1, and that is because they may have launched successful careers after Idol springboard, thus breaking out of WP:BLP1E. Most Season 5 contestants have been redirected. Ohconfucius (talk) 16:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * As for her career beyond Idol, keep in mind that she is one of the youngest Idol contestants, and may well have a lot of possibilities, especially in the Quebec market. Give it a bit of time.  Why the rush to delete articles?  People are not obliged to read this or any other article.  It's their choice whether or not to click on the links.  Let them have a wide choice.JD Fan (talk) 03:52, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * JD Fan, you should only say "Keep" once. Future comments should be labelled "Comment", not "Keep" to make it easier for people to gage opinions.  --Rob (talk) 14:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Nobody can predict what lies ahead. Proposing to keep an article based on her promise or potential is akin to looking in a crystal ball, and is an invalid argument for keeping an article. Ohconfucius (talk) 15:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Lucaskant (talk) 17:11, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I vote to keep this since it has historic significance as American Idol history is defining many of the entertainment bigwigs.
 * You failed to explain how this the subject or achievements are historical in any way. In actual fact, there is precious little biographical information if we cut out all the crap about what she did and what the show judges said. Ohconfucius (talk) 16:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The usual benchmark for Idol contestants is Top 3 unless they go on to do something notable beyond just being on Idol. Delete; if she gets a recording contract and releases a hit album later on, she can have an article at that time. Bearcat (talk) 20:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: the "benchmark" is WP:N, which says "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable".     --Rob (talk) 21:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Which there's absolutely no evidence that Mme St-Laurent has achieved to date, since all the sources at hand are either YouTube links, or directly linked to Canadian Idol itself. Bearcat (talk) 19:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You should be clearer in your comments. If you mean all other stories are mainly about her involvement in Canadian Idol say that.  If instead, you mean they're linked to the show, and just promoting it, then please say that (actually, don't say that, as it's libel).  Anyways, re-read WP:N, then re-read sources, such as National Post.  I didn't bring up YouTube, so, I'm not sure why you're attacking that straw man.  Rather then relying on your "benchmark" of "Top 3", consider the benchmark of WP:N, which is actually official.  Please show me policy that says "Top 3" has any relevance whatsoever.  Anways, I don't mind if this article is deleted.  I might make a new article, that includes proper citations from the start.  I'm intentionally not voting in what amounts to a popularity contest.   --Rob (talk) 20:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * A National-Post "two-minute interview" (i.e. a five-paragraph blurb) does not constitute significant coverage — I've had as much as that written about me in a notable media outlet, for gawd's sake, and that doesn't make me notable. And at least at the time that I made my comment, the only links anywhere in the article were to YouTube videos, Canadian Idol itself and companies (i.e. Sympatico) that have promotional tie-in deals with Canadian Idol and are owned by a company that also has partial ownership of CTV, making them not an independent source. And the notion that it's libellous to say that CTV and Sympatico have partial common ownership is frankly the most absurd statement I've heard since "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job." Bearcat (talk) 21:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete game show contestants are not inherently notable. Resolute 21:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your opinion of game show contestants. What's your opinion of Katherine St-Laurent who was on Canadian Idol, which is not a game show?  Any thoughts on how this person meets the notability criterion, such as what I quoted above?  Also, which Wikipdian do you think is arguing for the inherent notability of game show contestants?  Is it this person by any chance?  --Rob (talk) 21:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Though she should never have been voted off as early as she was, I don't think she is yet notable enough to warrant her own article in Wikipedia. I agree with the notion that game show contestants aren't inherently notable, including reality game shows and, as in this case, talent show contestants. So she was a contestant on Canadian Idol, that is not enough to warrant notability in my books. If she establishes some kind of career, then we're talking.Wikigonish (talk) 14:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with the editor directly above me as well as others who have basically said the same things. Being on the show isn't notable, getting at least 3rd place seems to be, she hasn't done anything outside of this and really, we don't know if she will.  If she does, good for her, then she'll be notable enough for an article.  It's also entirely possible that she won't be anything more than a local singer who sings at clubs on the weekends while she has a day job like the rest of us.  Dismas |(talk) 07:16, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Some Policy Questions I appreciate the points which have just been made, but am concerned about the following general considerations and matters of policy:

(1) American Idol and Canadian Idol are not just any game show, but rather are talent shows with very high audience ratings relative to other shows on TV. (Canadian Idol usually has around 2 million viewers.) In both cases, like it or not, they are part of the cultural history of the countries concerned.

(2) In Canada, there are also considerations of regional cultural history. With an east to west span of 5,000 km, Canada is one of the most highly regionalized countries in the world, with the result that contestants on Canadian Idol are of interest not only from the national but also the regional viewpoint: in effect, there are regional sub-markets for articles. For reasons of language and culture, this is especially true for Quebec. For the Quebec market, there is considerable interest in the francophone contestants.

(3) Looking at Idol competitions generally, there is the question of where to draw the line for notability. Some say, Top 3. But why Top 3 rather than Top 5 or Top 7? The fact is that for American and Canadian Idol, there are articles on the Top 10 - and these articles have been in place for years. In fact, Top 10 is the logical stopping point here, because the shows really start at the Top 10 point. If we are to avoid arbitrary, one-off decisions, we should really be using Top 10 rather than Top 3. Or we should be deleting all the other articles which are Top 10 but not Top 3. But that won't happen, because these articles have been in place for years and there are too many people who read those other articles and who are interested in them.

I think it's important for Wikipedia policies and practices to be consistent and to avoid arbitrary decisions on particular cases. Top 10 is the established practice for Idol contestants in the USA and Canada. Until this changes, the article on Katherine St-Laurent should stay in.

I appreciate the point that Katherine St-Laurent has yet to establish a music career, and I can see the logic in holding off on an article on her. But as long as there are articles on other Top 10 but not Top 3 contestants, her article should nevertheless stay in.

For the future, whatever the decision on this article at this time, I'm betting that she will indeed establish a career - otherwise, I would not be putting time into this article. After all, the judges on Canadian Idol did say that she had the best voice in the competition. (Yes, I agree that her performances were uneven, but there was much to build upon for the future.) One question is whether she would sing primarily in English or in French, noting that Audrey De Montigny sings mainly in French. I expect that initially, Katherine St-Laurent may sing in French, to establish herself in her home market. In that case, I would propose to leave the English Wikipedia article aside (whatever happens to it), to do the article in French instead, and to maintain the article in French, but not English.

JD Fan (talk) 17:50, 16 August 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.