Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Neighbours and Home and Away actors turned musicians (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 delete, no consensus to create a category straight-out. Anyone who wishes to proceed with turning it into a category is more than welcome to as a normal editorial action. If you do wish to do so, and are a non-administrator, please ask me and I'll make the text temporarily available to you.  Daniel Bryant  08:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

List of Neighbours and Home and Away actors turned musicians

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

First AfD

It's Original Research to combine two unrelated TV shows into one article this way. Also fairly indiscriminate, and innaccurate; some of these "actors turned musicians" were musicians before they were actors; some of them aren't even musicians, but pop singers; and some of these actors were cast members of other series before - why not list those shows as well?

I was interested to learn that Russell Crowe is "Male", so there is some encyclopedic information here. But seriously, this was nominated for deletion last year, with a No Consensus result, although the only 2 attempts at a "keep" argument I could see were "useful and interesting" and "appreciated by Australians". I think it should be deleted this time. Saikokira 02:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Sr13 (T|C) 03:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. OR. MSJapan 03:55, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. And by the way, why does this article exist? Is there a purpose to it? Noroton 04:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. A word of explanation: in Australia these two shows are often mentioned in the same breath - they are basically the only two shows in the category "Australian soaps", so the combination is hardly OR. The movement of stars of these shows into the music industry has been a much-discussed phenomenon in Australia. Especially given the varying levels of success.
 * Some of them aren't even musicians, but pop singers. Oh well. StAnselm 04:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Great, so source this much-discussed phenomenon. Pending that, this fails WP:ATT, so I can be counted upon for a Delete.   RGTraynor  16:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. WP:NOT Indiscriminate. Dallas and Dynasty used to get mentioned together, that doesn't mean Wikipedia should have an article listing any comparisons of Dallas and Dynasty cast members. Regarding the above comment; "they are basically the only two shows in the category "Australian soaps"". That's funny, because there are actually 40 different shows in Category:Australian television soap operas, not two. Pufnstuf 06:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Response: Yes, but these are the only two shows on the list that are currently still being aired! I could make up a category "current Australian soaps" if you like... StAnselm 06:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Except that this is an encyclopedia that shouldn't make reference to a "current" anything, because we don't use a "current" point of reference. It's hardly an article that can age well. zadignose 23:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete perhaps merits a mention in Music of Australia, but a table of data such as this is the epitome of WP:OR. Potatoswatter 07:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, soap-stars-turned-pop-singers are a notable phenomenon in Australia. Some of our most famous musical acts got their start on Neighbours (eg Kylie Minogue) or Home and Away (okay so mainly Neighbours). The ones from Neighbours often make it big in the UK too. --Candy-Panda 12:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete If they're a notable phenomenon they'll have their own articles (and they do). This article simply isn't required - this is what we have categories for.  Eliminator JR  Talk  14:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak keep per StAnselm. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 13:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.  -- Bduke 12:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Candy-Panda. JRG 13:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete per nom and ors. As noted it's original research and WP is not an indiscriminate collection of information. As for StAnslem, being mentioned in the same breath does not justify an article. It would be like me creating a list of people who've received heart transplants. It's useless information and of no encylopeadic benefit. Thewinchester (talk) 13:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and create category - Create a category called "Australian Soap Stars who are also musicians" if desired. This is definitely what categories are for. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 20:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per both WP:OR and WP:NOT. -FisherQueen (Talk) 21:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOT, WP:OR. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 23:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unfortunately, seems to be an indiscriminate collection of information although a noticeable phenomenon. Capitalistroadster 02:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - as a compromise to get rid of indiscriminate lists, why don't we merge the content (verified of course) into the separate Home and Away and Neighbours articles? That way it is a notable part of the shows, that some of their ex-actors have gone into music careers, rather than a list that is a bit random and doesn't really add anything special to WP. JRG 06:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No reason that shouldn't be done now as a matter of course.   RGTraynor  06:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete, as per Sr13 above. Lankiveil 11:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC).
 * Delete, perhaps categorise as per Alucard. There is no reason for a list of people who meet a set of arbitrary and somewhat unrelated conditions. Orderinchaos 14:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, as per Sr13 above. not yet another pointless list. Rimmeraj 01:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete turn it into a category if it must exist, but as above, its just another bloody list. Nomadtales 06:39, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and merge into the program articles. The music/soap star link is interesting but not enough for its own page. Euryalus 09:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and create category per Alucard (Dr.). Fishhead64 17:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, pointless list, anyway the list is basically covered by the category "Before they were stars" Bandwagonman 14:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, and don't even consider a category or else get ready for an immediate CfD which can hardly fail. This is a bizarre intersection.  Even categorizing "Neighbors Actors" is highly questionable.  Categorizing them as "turned musicians" is worse.  Intersecting the various performers who played some part in one of two different shows because they are "current," soap operas, and Australian is going WAY too far.  This is all in addition to the facts that we shouldn't use a "current" time frame, the actors listed aren't all current members of the cast of either show, and many are more noted for other career achievements than their participation in these shows.  The practice of telling editors to turn bad lists into categories, then telling them to turn bad categories into lists is a bad practice.  It simply forces us to do more work while endlessly shuffling our problems back and forth. zadignose 23:41, 16 April 2007 (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.