Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pete Bennett


 * 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 big keep. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 08:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Pete Bennett
This guy is so not notable. All he's done is won Big Brother. talk to JD wants e-mail 19:36, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. So he's in a band but they don't even have a record deal. Therefore my vote is to delete and redirect to List of Big Brother housemates (UK series 7). Recreate if his band ever becomes successful or if he does anything other than win BB. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep I guess. I don't reckon most reality-show contestants are notable, but he did win the series. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  19:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Millions of TV watchers have followed his life closely, that makes him notable. Han-Kwang 21:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - per Andrew Lenahan and Han-Kwang. --Daniel Olsen 21:23, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep All other previous winners are listed, it would throw the wikipedia sequence out. It makes no sense to delete him, as he is currently in the public eye, and thus a celebrity.
 * Keep Miilions of viewers make it notable, and its not as though there aren't thousands of references we could choose from as well. Winning Big Brother may be a stupid reason for being famous/celebrity, but he is a celebrity non the less now. Tom Michael -  Mostly Zen  [[Image:Baby_tao.jpg]] ( talk ) 23:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep I suppose you're planning to nominate Paris Hilton next? Undeserved notability is notability nonetheless. -Elmer Clark 00:39, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: ...odd nomination, nominator is a member of the Big Brother Wikiproject. -Elmer Clark 00:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't say anything about notability being undeserved, I said he wasn't notable. All he's done is won a television show, and the information on his article could easily be merged to the series' article, as it doesn't have any information of post-Big Brother experiences. talk to JD wants e-mail 00:45, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Nearly all the information in this article is already contained in the list of housemates article, as so far he hasn't done anything notable post BB. Being the winner doesn't make you more notable if all you've done is appear on a reality TV show. Until he actually does something, his section in the list of housemates article is all that is necessary. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Pete Bennett isn't notable. Winning a contest doesn't establish notability. -- Mikeblas 02:55, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Pete Bennett is notable. He'll be quite popular and has signed with the same agent as Davina McCall-- Range 06:55, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Anthony Hutton, Nadia Almada, Cameron Stout, Kate Lawler, Brian Dowling and Craig Phillips are all champions of their respective Big Brother season and do have articles based on them. As Pete won on the 18th August (2 days after this comment was placed) he has yet to put any media attention forward.
 * Keep per above. --badlydrawnjeff talk 13:18, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * When this man does something more notable you may make an article like say he goes on to do something more famous if not he can stay in Big Brother Housemates list. And you could say that if this man deserves an article then Nikki deserves one and Glyn deserves one so there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KWliKid (talk • contribs) 17:47, August 20, 2006.
 * Speedy keep Cameron Stout has his own page, and nobody remembers him. Pete, on the other hand, has his own band, was already a local cult celebrity in Brighton, had the shortest odds of any Big Brother contestant at the halfway stage (1/8), was the only bookmakers' favourite to win the entire series, is already regarded as being one of the greatest housemates that's ever lived, and is the favourite with Ladbrokes at 2/1 with Daddy Fantastic to have the Christmas Number 1 single, despite not having released a commercial single yet. The idea that he shouldn't have his own page is laughable and is actually giving me a painful stitch due to me laughing so hard at how ridiculous it is. I am in agony but I will continue writing to portray your ignorance on the subject. And anyway, why shouldn't he have his own page? Is there a limited number of pages allowed on this site? Is there a drought? No, there isn't. You're just being idiots. Pete deserves his own page, and there is no reason for having this deleted. Owned. Luke God 17:51, 20 August 2006 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.65.76.231 (talk • contribs) 17:52, August 20, 2006
 * Keep. Probably the most notable of all the UK BB winners.--Shantavira 17:06, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Some of the other Big Brother contestants, who didn't even win, are much more notable than Pete Bennett. talk to JD wants e-mail 17:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Funny, then, that you couldn't name a single one. Now listen, child-like insect, we're all fed up of your pathetic anti-Pete/anti-Big Brother bias. You don't have a single viable point and you know it. This page is not going to be deleted, and you're wasting your time going against a huge majority of people that have already rubbished your so-called argument. You were an idiot for thinking you had a chance in the first place, and you're even more of an idiot now. Pete is staying, Pete deserves it, you lose. Get the message, and don't bother writing a reply.
 * Ryan Fitzgerald, Bree Amer, Jade Goody, Wesley Denning, Blair McDonough (he was on Big Brother before Neighbours, but he didn't win) Simon Deering, Danielle Foote, Derek Laud, Michelle Bass. Most of them are from Big Brother Australia, but the point I'm trying to make is the same.  These people are notable for things that they did outside of Big Brother, and not one of them won any Big Brother series.  talk to JD wants e-mail 09:26, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Look, seriously. You know you're wrong. You know this isn't going to be deleted. You have a large number of people telling you to get your head out of your arse and stop pissing all over Pete's achievement and get on with your miserable life. You've got evidence that wanks all over your supposed arguments in the forms of pages for Anthony Hutton and Cameron Stout, who are no longer famous and weren't very well known in the first place, compared to Pete who was the biggest Big Brother favourite in the shows existence, has a highly anticipated band who are favourites for the Christmas Number 1 single...I can't believe, actually, that you are still trying to drag this discussion out. I have single handedly proven that you are an idiot, and a host of others have also stated that they disagree with you, and you are in a minority that shouldn't have existed in the first place. Once again, Pete is staying on here. There is no reason to take him off even if you did believe he wasn't noteworthy. There is no shortage of available Wikipedia pages. All you're doing is trying to ruin Pete's credibility because you probably supported Aisleyne or someone, or maybe you just hate Big Brother and you're a massive hit on the Restoration page or something. Either way, don't bother responding because you just can't win. Take care now, honey.
 * That is mostly point of view and speculation, none of which has a place on Wikipedia. Personal attacks aren't going to make the closing administrator any more inclined to not delete the article if they have good reason to.  talk to JD wants e-mail 10:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep as per majority of toher keep comments here Tyhopho 17:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep As per most comments here.Xzamuel 20:36, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per above Will (Take me down to the Paradise City) 21:34, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep:Popular, even a personaility among the public. Leemorrison 22:10, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per numerous above. Essexmutant 22:45, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I came to this article because I wanted to find out about him. Presumably other people do that, and isn't that the point of Wikipedia? His article being read means his article should stay. Deiseruus 11:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Most notable and potentially most memorable housemate of the entire series run. And keeps things consistent re: previous series winners. --jc 19:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Every winner should have a page, but we ought to keep an eye on them to make sure they have notability outside BB. If not, it may be more difficult. --Ross UK 21:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep If other BB housemates, let alone winners, get an entry, Pete certainly should. Chapwithwings 23:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep At least give him a couple of months to see if he can become as popular as Craig, Brian, etc. Don't forget what happened to Chantelle Houghton: one minute a failed Paris Hilton look-alike, the next, CELEBRITY! Quizman 1967 -  Ul ve rs ton  14:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep of course, as all the other winners have articles. -- Alex  talk here 14:30, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep He has done something notable, even if you do think winning BB is 'cheap.' Anon Dude 10:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm changing my vote from delete. I've thought about it, and I think winning Big Brother is enough for him to have an article. After all, Wikipedia is not paper. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete 2 reasons - 1. all he did was win a reality TV show and swore a lot and 2. I am not a fan of his and I believe Glyn should have won. Anyway, there's no point arguing really so keep the page if you really want but I don't find it particularly notable. Can't it just go on his section on the BB housemates page? Michaelritchie200 21:51, 23 August 2006 (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.