Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa Kelly (Ice Road Trucker) (2nd nomination)


 * 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. It appears that reliable sources have established that the subject meets the notability guidelines for biographies. (non-admin closure) Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  00:43, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Lisa Kelly (Ice Road Trucker)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article was previously nominated for deletion with the argument:

"Per WP:BIO (especially WP:BASIC and WP:ANYBIO): notability not established; relies largely on 2 primary sources, including a self-published source"

at Articles_for_deletion/Lisa_Kelly_(Ice_Road_Trucker). The resulting discussion resulted in a closure of no consensus. Examining the keep arguments, however, they look to be largely unacceptable, including gems like "I wanna marry her" or that she has an IMDb. None of the keep arguments previously expressed make up for the issues with sourcing. Yaksar (let's chat) 03:25, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Merge into Ice Road Truckers? A bit of press coverage would make her notable, but there's currently no secondary sources listed. --Colapeninsula (talk)


 * Keep. Lisa Kelly is a notable person and she is a state freestyle motocross champion, motocross rider. She has appeared and been credited in two television series. IRT: Deadliest Roads - 23 episodes (link), and Ice Road Truckers - 39 episodes(Link) in History TV18 television series, now this show is very famous in India. She has also appeared as a guest on the talk show Late Show with David Letterman. She also has a entry on the Internet Move Database - Lisa Kelly, So please remove tag from the article thank you.   Ramesh Ramaiah   talk  13:37, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Please don't delete the article she is notable person.   Ramesh Ramaiah   talk  15:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * duplicate !vote struck -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:34, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * ̶M̶e̶r̶g̶e̶ Keep into Ice Road Truckers. All real news sources that I can find ( and ) only refer to her in reference to the IRT show (which itself has demonstrated some notability).  Fails WP:GNG Significant coverage, coverage that does exist is not independent of the subject nor is it from secondary sources.  The only references in the article are from her employer or her blog/website. --Stvfetterly (talk) 15:23, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - As an FYI Ramesh, you are only supposed to indicate your preference once in an AFD.-- Stv Fett erly  (Edits)  15:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. She has been featured in dozens of TV programmes over multiple series over several years years. These have been seen by millions of people in many countries around the world. These series are securely archived on published DVD's and the information in the article can be abstracted from these. It is beyond ridiculous that someone so well known to so many people would fail inclusion tests when minor musicians or sportsmen can be included on the basis of some insignificant article in a local paper. PRL42 (talk) 17:33, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep as she has been heavily featured in three seasons of Ice Road Truckers and two seasons of IRT: Deadliest Roads. Definitely notable as a trucker, reality star, and motocross racer. Tavix | Talk  18:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - If she is as notable as people are implying then find some independent references and add them to the article. Newspapers, books, etc. would all work and I would change my merge to a keep.  However, to date no references that aren't self published or IRT promo stuff have been provided.-- Stv  Fett erly  (Edits)  15:13, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Why bother? If people insist on wiki-lawyering on the basis that someone as relatively well known as LK must have citations that are not self-published then they must accept the rules. There is material that is not self-published. PRL42 (talk) 16:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Your argument would hold more weight if we could provide some of the independent material that you have said exists out there. I've only been able to find the following pseudo-story:  in google news searches.  Do you know of other sources that we can use to help to indicate notability (beyond that of the IRT TV show website and her own blog)?-- Stv  Fett erly  (Edits)  21:02, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As I said, I'm not interested in wikilawyering. My argument is that the information can be extracted from five TV series that have been published on DVD. These series are editorially independent of the subject and so, unless there is a policy that a DVD is not a published source, notability is met. PRL42 (talk) 09:17, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'm not entirely sure how attempting to establish notability is 'wikilawyering'. Besides pretty clearly violating WP:BLP1E . . . by your logic every cast member of every TV series released on DVD is then notable.  I'm far from a deletionist here on wikipedia, but this reasoning seems a tad over-inclusive, don't you think?  You might want to also check out WP:NPF to further understand why people do not agree that Lisa Kelly's personal website and facebook account valid sources in this case.  Since you seem confused as to why the DVDs produced by L. Kelly's employer and her own website/facebook account are not sufficient to establish notability:
 * Lisa Kelly is not employed by the History Channel. PRL42 (talk) 15:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The article fails WP:GNG - Significant Coverage as there are no reliable sources that are independent of the subject that address the subject directly in detail (her employer, the History network is not independent of the subject.
 * Lisa Kelly is not employed by the History Channel. PRL42 (talk) 15:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The article fails the criteria defined in WP:GNG - Reliability "Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability". There are no secondary sources, just Kelly and her employer.
 * Lisa Kelly is not employed by the History Channel. PRL42 (talk) 15:38, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The article fails WP:GNG - Sources, "for notability purposes, should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability" - there are no secondary sources in this article.
 * There are secondary sources. Lisa Kelly is not employed by the History Channel. PRL42 (talk) 15:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The article does not meet WP:GNG - Independent of the subject, as all sources are from Kelly's website, or her employer, there are no independent sources.
 * Lisa Kelly is not employed by the History Channel. PRL42 (talk) 15:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Please understand again, there's no attempt to 'wikilawyer' anything here . . . your argument fails the notability guidelines for wikipedia on 4/5 points. I've been trying to find other articles online to demonstrate some notability, but the one mini article from fox news that mentions her in passing (that I posted above) is all I've been able to find that's independent.  In light of that, I don't see how you can argue to keep the article.-- Stv  Fett erly  (Edits)  14:04, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - I think you are the one who is confused. And your confusion seems to so serious enough that it entirely explains why the wall of text above is not relevant. The History Channel IS NOT LISA KELLY'S EMPLOYER.
 * Please understand that despite your best efforts to show the article fails various WP's, you yourself have failed because, again: The History Channel IS NOT LISA KELLY'S EMPLOYER. Her notability arises from being featured on several series of programmes. If we were to use the logic you seem to be using: that anyone featured by some media operation - newspaper, magazine, tv producer, magazine publisher, etc, becomes an employee of that operation then no one would be notable because the very act of focusing on them would remove the focuser from the realm of 'secondary source'. PRL42 (talk) 16:52, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ice Road Truckers and off-shoot shows are distributed by A+E Networks. A+E Networks pays Ms. Kelly's salary by paying the production company for her work on the series.  According to wikipedia, A+E networks also owns the History Channel who air the show.  Why don't you consider the person who pays Ms. Kelly to star in a show her employer?-- Stv  Fett erly  (Edits)  16:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * If you provide a credible source for that I'll consider it (but it must be a credible source that shows they were the people who employed her to do that for which she is being claimed noteworthy - you can't disclaim noteworthiness on the basis that someone later happens to employ someone they have previously featured as something other than an employee). At the moment, as far as I am aware, she was simply a person who was featured on several series of TV programmes. Her employer, as far as it is relevant to the reason for her notaability, was the trucking companies for whom she drove. PRL42 (talk) 16:52, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As a further aside, it's not good etiquette to add unsigned comments in the middle of blocks of text written by other users. You might want to give WP:EQ a read through.-- Stv  Fett erly  (Edits)  16:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ooops. OK, I forgot to add all the tildes. Mea culpa. But anyone with the slightest intelligence could immediately see who put them there. But keep on wiki-lawyering as it seems to keep you happy. PRL42 (talk) 16:52, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * PRL42 - Please refrain from further editing of my posts as you have done here . Please also refrain from further personal insults in this debate.-- Stv  Fett erly  (Edits)  18:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I have not edited your post. I simply used the correct mechanism to sign some of mine that I forgot. Since you have been caught out trying to use a false objection, namely that LK was employed by the History Channel during the time she was featured, you have started adding pedantic, whiny, comments about things that are completely unrelated to the subject at hand. PRL42 (talk) 19:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The first sentence of this link indicates that the IRT drivers sign contracts with the History Channel.-- Stv  Fett erly  (Edits)  22:11, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Please provide evidence that this is an employment contract rather than a standard contract that allows the company to use material involving the subject. It appears that the subject is employed by the trucking company who are paying them by the load. PRL42 (talk) 08:58, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * This whole debate is entirely irrelevant. The sole matter at issue is whether Kelly merits her own article, and who employs her has nothing to do with this whatsoever. The History Channel self-evidently isn't a third-party source when reporting on matters concerning its own program content. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:22, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * If featuring someone or something means that you are no longer a secondary source with respect to that thing then you can never have a secondary source. Hence your assertion is absurd. The point is that THC is a secondary source wrt LK. Not too important now as further secondary sources have been provided. PRL42 (talk) 10:14, 12 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge with Ice Road Truckers - there appear to be insufficient independent reliable sources to establish any notability for Kelly beyond her participation in the TV programs. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:22, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - Ice Road Truckers is syndicated worldwide and, as the only female trucker, Lisa Kelly certainly stands out for more attentions than most. It wasn't difficult to find several items of news coverage, particularly this one but also this one and this one. Sionk (talk) 16:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - In light of the sources that Sionk has found (and have been added to the article) I've changed my merge to keep. The article is still leaning pretty heavily on primary sources though.-- Stv  Fett erly  (Edits)  12:48, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Significant coverage exists in multiple reliable sources, such as the ones posted above by Sionk and another one here; subject meets WP:GNG.  Gongshow  Talk 23:26, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. per Gongshow: the coverage exists. It just needs to be included in the article. Jarkeld (talk) 00:03, 14 March 2012 (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.