Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maddie Ziegler


 * 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. Based purely around the notability arguments, this close should not be interpreted as taking a stance on either side of the "exploited" question, which is irrelevant for the purposes of a Wikipedia AFD discussion. Lankiveil (speak to me) 07:48, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Maddie Ziegler

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Child whose borderline notability comes from being exploited by the entertainment industry in sexualized shows. We of course need an article about the show, and I can see including the childrens name in that article, But highlighting it with an article is a clear violation of child protection. The situation is a little different than some of these articles, because she was 9, not 6 at the time of the abuse, but I think that still qualifies as child.  DGG ( talk ) 02:27, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  02:41, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:21, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:21, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:21, 3 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete or redirect to Dance Moms. This actress does not seem to be known for anything outside of Dance Moms. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 00:43, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge to Dance Moms and per nom. →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  08:44, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - To be honest I've been between keep & delete for the last 2-3 days, Whether she was exploited is another discussion for another day, We're NOTCENSORED and thus I believe it should be kept per that, As per below she's appeared in a music video so the notability is there. →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  12:09, 8 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, then recreate as a redirect to Dance Moms. Mabalu (talk) 02:01, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep not quite sure what the nomination justification that she is "exploited" by the entertainment industry has anything to do with her notability. Being featured in the recent Chandelier video suggests that she does more than simply being associated with Dance Moms. Sounds to me like the nominator has a serious case of PoV bias. --Kuzwa (talk) 02:20, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I also want to know what Wikipedia policy is being violated in this case? Is it the fact that she isn't notable, or is there some WP policy regarding "exploitation" of children in articles that I am not aware of. I find the grounds of this AFD and the votes dubious. --Kuzwa (talk) 02:28, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep the fact that she stars in the new music video of Sia (Chandelier) changes the perspective concerning her fame. Mro (talk) 04:15, 8 May 2014 (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.