Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dion Cooper

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 Draftify. And anticipating a move back to main space in the future. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:42, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dion Cooper

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There's not enough in-depth coverage to show that this person passes WP:GNG. As per WP:REALITYSINGER, this could be redirected if a suitable target appears. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:51, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Netherlands. Shellwood (talk) 14:52, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:SINGER, except for possibly point #12. However, point #12 is offset by point #2 in WP:REALITYSINGER. In this case, he's been on a couple different reality singing shows, so I'd say delete instead of redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:58, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:SIGCOV. Too early in their career. scope_creep^Talk 16:31, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify and redirect to Netherlands in the Eurovision Song Contest 2023 for the time being. The subject will likely become more notable in the near future (due to his scheduled participation in the Eurovision Song Contest), so it would be better to allow for further expansion of the article in draftspace. — Ætoms ^[talk] 12:35, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are multiple WP:SIGCOV references in the article and many more sources online. gidonb (talk) 23:02, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but as far as I can tell all of them are about one announcement. There aren't normally articles for people notable for just that. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 12:34, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I can't follow your reaction. You seem to be unhappy with the references. The reason is unclear to me. Maybe write it in Dutch on my talk page? gidonb (talk) 13:56, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of individual news events that a bunch of different sources write about at once, but for which we don't have an article about the topic. Because all those articles say basically the same thing; there is not much to write about. Like in this article, all the SIGCOV sources support just one sentence. So for this reason, per the first point of WP:WHYN, this topic should be merged into another article (in this case, all relevant info is already in Netherlands in the Eurovision Song Contest 2022). There's also WP:BLP1E which explicitly states this about people notable for one event, although I'm not sure if it applies here. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 21:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. The fact that the existing WP:SIGCOV references could be better put to use is no reason to delete the article. Only to fix it. So WP:WHYN #1 does not apply.

If WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a reason to delete, and it isn't, then "other stuff does not exist" is no reason to delete either. Articles are kept on merits or deleted on lack of merits. This article has the merits of WP:SIGCOV.

BLP1E does not apply at all, as Dion Cooper is known for multiple performances. For sure, the first big appearance (a popular talent show) did NOT (!) pull Dion over the WP:N line. Some folks then err to discount an event entirely to force BLP1E on a ~~BLP~~BLP2E, as undue as it would be. One shouldn't. Everything counts and we weigh the totality of people's careers, as covered in WP:RS. gidonb (talk) 09:12, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is that those references could not be better put to use. They purely discuss the announcement.

But you're right that it probably does not meet BLP1E as Cooper is not a low-profile individual, but he certainly does meet point 1 of BLP1E. Sure he's done multiple performances, but those are barely covered in independent reliable sources, so he is not notable for that. His sole reason for notability would be the announcement of his participation in Eurovision. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 13:26, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This has become highly repetitive. It all has been refuted before. Do not put responses under someone's well established opinion, just for the sake arguing. It's your only "contribution" to the discussion here. The difference that we make is in the article space so repetitive and refuted arguments help neither of us at productivity. gidonb (talk) 14:52, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What, where does that suddenly come from? You said that the references could be put to better use, I disagreed, so I replied. The reason I replied only to you is because you are the only one here who wanted to keep the article, and I have nothing to say really about what other people said, so I didn't reply to them. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 15:09, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It started incomprehensibly and now has become a yes-no argument. That's not the purpose of discussions. I often do not agree with someone entirely. It's not a reason to keep arguing under their opinion, without bringing anything new to the table. gidonb (talk) 15:15, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Back to my point. The amount and quality of coverage are sufficient for WP:GNG. Others want to draftify for a while, then move back to the article space. This takes up some resources but attaining more quality is by itself a worthy goal! The bottom-line will be the same. gidonb (talk) 17:44, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. Likely to be notable in the short term future, but not there yet. Grk1011 (talk) 16:41, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Move to draft space. Not yet notable but this will likely change in the future as we approach Eurovision 2023. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 13:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:43, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. I'd say to move this to the drafts. It'll be notable soon; but it does need some work. Nascar9919 (talk) 07:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think I have already made my opinion clear above, but I guess I'll state it again in bold then. Draftify/delete ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 00:16, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.