Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jay Wynn

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. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:21, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jay Wynn[edit]

[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)

WP:BLP of a person notable only for being a non-winning contestant on a reality show. This is not a claim of notability that clinches a Wikipedia article -- a person who didn't win a reality show can still clear the bar if they go on to accomplish something else that clears a notability standard (i.e. some people who didn't win an Idol series have still gone on to become pop stars or musical theatre performers who passed other WP:NMUSIC criteria) -- but the winner of the reality show is the only person who gets to claim notability because of the reality show itself. And the small amount of media coverage shown here just makes him a WP:BLP1E, because there's not nearly enough of it being shown to demonstrate that he would warrant special treatment over and above all the other non-winning reality show contestants in the history of reality shows. Bearcat (talk) 03:04, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:06, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:06, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 05:00, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No plausible case for notability I can see, and it's so thin on details it can't even decide on a birth year. --Calton | Talk 05:17, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow, useless tabloid articles! THAT certainly will change my mind.

No, wait, I meant the opposite. I confirm my previous decision. --Calton | Talk 16:31, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Not a BLP1E: There is previous press coverage of his robot construction in connection with his winning first prize for costuming at a local SF convention. Between the two, I was able to find and add many press references, even though the local news site's coverage of the convention robot was irrecoverable; note that the video reference I added concerns the convention robot. There's also a dash of post-BGT coverage that I cited: he was commissioned to make a robot suit for a new TV series. Also, a search will reveal several tabloid articles: Daily Mail, Sun, etc., and these include coverage of the convention robot. I did not use those per BLP, but their existence strengthens the case for notability, especially since they are not all regarding his BGT appearance. That we don't have an exact birth year is neither here nor there: people of all levels of notability don't have published birth years, just ages on a specific date like this person, or sometimes even less. (I did a lot of work on this article and would have expected to be notified when it was nominated for deletion.) Yngvadottir (talk) 06:42, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Press coverage suggested by Yngvadottir is not substantial enough. A local prize in a contest and a prop for a film is still not enough to justify an already unnotable WP:BLP1E article. –eggofreason^talk 14:12, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't know how this can be seen as a BLP1E when he received coverage for another event a good half-year before the reality show, or how the press coverage can be called insubstantial. For the record, in addition to the coverage of his participation in Britain's Got Talent, there are also "Fans at odds with judges' choices for Britain's Got Talent semi-finals" (The Irish News), " Britain's Got Talent viewers OUTRAGED as robot sails through to semi-finals: 'NOT funny!'" (Daily Express), and further coverage of him as one of the candidates such as "A wynning act? Who is Jay Wynn? Britain’s Got Talent 2017 semi-finalist and singer who divided judges with his singing robot routine" (The Sun). On the previous year's giant robot suit, tehre is also "The 'apocalyptic exosuit': Comic fan builds gigantic Halloween costume - that takes 20 MINUTES to put on" (Daily Mail) and , "The best Halloween costume ever is 10ft tall ROBOT made from recycled materials and it's got built-in stilts", (Daily Mirror). All of these save possibly The Irish News are tabloids (and the Sun is truly routine), so it would be inappropriate to reference them in the article, but they add to the weight of coverage as well as supporting my pointing out that he had already received press coverage before BGT. (Plus two of the BGT articles are special coverage of his selection as a surprise.) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:14, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I can only admire the work done on this article by Yngvadottir, but I'm afraid it still doesn't demonstrate notability. A few local news sources and some mentions of his TV appearance just don't add up to enough. And I disagree about the Express/Mail/Mirror/Sun sources. If they are unacceptable as a source of facts for a biography of a living person then they shouldn't count towards notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:10, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Effectively a BLP1E since the coverage is overwhelmingly related to that appearance. If the coverage of his comic book convention cosplay had made him notable before he was on BGT, that would be a different matter, but it clearly did not.

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.