Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of teen idols


 * 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 as per WP:NOT. FayssalF -  Wiki me up®  10:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

List of teen idols

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

WP:NOT and unsourced original research. Masaruemoto 03:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:OR - Did the article creator label them "teen idols" ? Corpx 05:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - OR. One person's "teen idol" may be another's "teen idle" - I mean, Michael Jackson & Britney Spears are on there!? Who in their right mind would look up to Spears now unless you wanted to copy a road map to boozing, sex and umbrella fighting? There's undue weight given to the recent years; it's not as if teens have suddenly arrived, they've been around since the dawn of time. So why the shortage in the earlier years of the list? Basically, it's impossible for anyone to update this list without major major citation inclusions or by placing their own OR. It'll end up being "Oh, I look up to this person, I think I'll add them to the list..." and someone's bound to disagree. I don't think I need to say much else; this article is obviously one of those which get deleted without thinking too hard about why. Cheers, Spawn Man 05:26, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete What kind of list is this? This list is a complete joke. How can you call someone a "teen idol"? RS1900 05:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

NOT! Mandsford 22:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - practically any young person who has made a record in the last 60 years could arguably be called a "teen idol". This list appears to be totally random and open-ended. Gatoclass 05:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete lack of sources indicates original research. I'm not even convinced that it would belong if it were sourced (or indeed sourceable). Jakew 10:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - When I was a teen I looked up to myself and I'm not on that list... Seriously as per nomination a perfect case for WP:NOT.  1 redrun  Talk 11:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete As per WP:NOT. Also the article is full of OR and POV statements. DBZROCKS   Its over 9000!!!  12:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete You know a list is unfocused when it features Charlie Chaplin, Steve Urkel, and Kurt Cobain. The intro just states that any performer with an international or domestic teenage fan base qualifies.  This would include nearly every musician, actor, sports star, and wrestler on the past century. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  13:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Who decides if it's an "idol" idolised by teens, or an "idol" who is a teenager? --WebHamster 13:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * According to the intro text, just being liked by teens is good enough. Quite a lot of those listed were well out of their teens at their time of popularity: Henry Winkler played the Fonz in his mid-30s, Hulk Hogan was about 35 at his height, etc. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete A snowball is rolling here... my grandfather had a pinup of Alice Roosevelt on his wall.
 * Delete for being a indiscriminate list without clear inclusion criteria. And break out the snow shovel. -- B figura  (talk) 22:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Improve by using verifiable sources.71.92.70.77 03:42, 7 September 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.