Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristen McNamara


 * 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. Despite the numbers, the delete arguments are well grounded in that the sources given do not cover the subject in sufficient depth to show notability. Kevin (talk) 05:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Kristen McNamara

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Kristen was a finalist on Nashville Star in 2006 (finishing 6th) and then a semi-finalist on American Idol in season 8. The main problem I have is that the sourcing is terrible. It's basically fansites and the USA site for Nashville Star and nothing else. We have a general guideline about semi-finalists on Idol not having articles simply because generally they aren't notable. They don't have careers much beyond Idol. The argument to keep her article seems to be that she was on Nashville Star. But in the end, that's essentially a cable reality show. It would be different if there were wonderful sources all over the place and there was in any indication that she was ever going to be notable but there simply isn't. It should be redirected to the AI8 article. User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 23:32, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep For me the sources aren't terrible, her official page is reliable enough, she can't lie about her own life and the other sources, like the Nashville Star one are reliable too. Facha93 (talk) 00:23, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:22, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * We need to have OUTSIDE sources, especially for BLP articles such as Kristen's. And I'm not making this up. :) See here, here and other places. Official websites are often promotional in nature. Fansites generally do not post anything negative to the artist involved and they often have 0 fact checking. To show notability, we have to basically have 3rd party sources say "hey this person is notable". We simply don't have that here. And that's not even getting into the point I made about AI semi-finalists generally doing nothing beyond the show. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 04:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Best I'm finding are these:, , . The first might be a good second source, but I'd want to see a biographical article in an independent reliable source. So  weak delete  for now. 07:03, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Based on that 3rd source by Facha93, I'm moving to keep. That source, plus the second one they supplied (much weaker) and the ones I found move this over the bar and clearly meets WP:N... Hobit (talk) 06:19, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Major problem here that I just noticed. There is no indication of what reference goes with which material. I didn't notice it until this edit. No indication of what the references relate to. So which material comes from which sources? We can't have just a random list of sources. Sourcing doesn't work that way. You gotta say that a point comes from this source. We don't do random lists of sources and then leave it up to the reader to figure out what comes from which. Very very bad idea for BLP articles. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 22:00, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I found this sources which I think are reliable, and this one I guess is the most reliable of all . Facha93 (talk) 18:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Still pretty weak sources. And it still doesn't touch on her notability. How does being on Nashville Star for a few weeks push her over the edge into notability? Because it's long established that being a semi-finalist on Idol generally isn't enough. She didn't even make the wild card show. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 01:05, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks Hobit, the sources I found are strong and being on Nashville Star makes her notable, why being a finalist on American Idol makes people notable and not being on Nashville Star? Facha93 (talk) 19:56, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Simple. Nashville Star does not have nearly the reach of American Idol. If you look at the Nashville Star page, generally only the winners have articles. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 21:57, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep You said it 'generally', this is the exception. 190.134.51.180 (talk) 23:45, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Conditional keep - While I believe that the article's current condition may not reach notability standards, I also believe that there is a possibility that the article may still be expanded given that the show (and tour) has just recently ended and there is still little time for the semi-finalists and finalists to get their work done. I do think that if after six months the article is not expanded and/or there is no major (or even medium-sized) release (or activity) from the artist, then there is no reason not to delete.--23prootie (talk) 21:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment -Possibly qualifies #1 of WP:ENTERTAINER as a professional reality star.--23prootie (talk) 01:09, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Lacks reliable sources to pass WP:BIO and does not pass any criteria of WP:MUSIC. The sources located in the article either are either first-hand sources, fan sites or non-reliable sources.  I was waiting to comment to see if any of the links provided in the AfD would be added to the article.  Since they have not, I have to judge the article as it stands now.  She should have some reliable sources being on the two shows, but unfortunately she does not. For the sources provided here 1) Fox4kc - trivial mention, 2) realitytvworld - non-reliable source, 3) MTV - trivial mention, 4) Mahalo - non-reliable source, and 5) Los Angeles Times - trivial mention.  The best sources is 6) The York Dispatch but it fails the first criteria of WP:MUSIC because this is an interview that fails "other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves."  If this would be considered a reliable source it is only one failing the "multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable." Aspects (talk) 05:48, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * First of all, you not only don't have to "judge the article as it stands now" you aren't supposed to. AfD is about the topic meeting our guidelines, not the article.  See WP:DEL.  Secondly, failing WP:MUSIC isn't a reason to delete if if meets WP:N.    So we have  which is an entire (very long) article about the topic in a RS,  which is an entire (very short) article about the topic in an RS,  which certainly appears to be a RS that is about 25% about the topic and ~3 other RSes which spend a few sentences on her.  It's 3 non-trivial reliable sources with a fair bit of borderline trivial coverage past that. Clearly over the bar of [WP:N]. Hobit (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I absolutely agree with Hobit, we should judge the topic, not the article as it is now. The sources are reliable and not trival. Facha93 (talk) 16:58, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Switch to keep. --The article could relatively pass right now after some editing.-- ᜊᜓᜅ ᜅ᜔ ᜑᜎᜋᜅ᜔ ᜋᜑᜒᜏᜄ ( ᜑ᜔ᜎᜒᜃ ᜐᜓᜋᜎᜒ ᜃ ᜐ ᜂᜐᜉᜈ ) 22:04, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Nothing has been added, though. Reference format have been fixed but they are still very poor references. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 00:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Added new sources including one that is very reliable (yes the MTV one).-- ᜊᜓᜅ ᜅ᜔ ᜑᜎᜋᜅ᜔ ᜋᜑᜒᜏᜄ ( ᜑ᜔ᜎᜒᜃ ᜐᜓᜋᜎᜒ ᜃ ᜐ ᜂᜐᜉᜈ ) 05:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as a very minor TV celeb. Sources are insufficient to establish importance as required by WP:BIO. Glass  Cobra  20:48, 25 September 2009 (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.