Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lacey Schwimmer

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 that there was no consensus, and the article was kept. --Abu-Fool Danyal ibn Amir al-Makhiri 19:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lacey Schwimmer[edit]

Unnotable person RandomHumanoid 04:28, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not noteworthy This person does not satisfy WP:BIO --RandomHumanoid 04:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film and TV-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 04:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Schwimmer is the winner of multiple national championship titles. She was also just named today as a top-20 finalist (out of thousands auditioned) on Season Three of the American television program So You Think You Can Dance. If her only notability were being a finalist on the television show, I don't think that that would satisfy WP:BIO, but her multiple national titles certainly do. --El on ka 04:50, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you document any of these awards? --RandomHumanoid 05:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, doing that now (I just created the stub a couple days ago). For example, check here: [1][2] --El on ka 05:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say I'm not impressed. Funny how we don't have math olympiad winners here but the national youth latin dance champion (?) merits an entry. Very bizarre to me but I'm an elitist, so what can you expect? --RandomHumanoid 08:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Well. She is on a high rated dance tv show. And she's the sister of a past champ of said program. Lots of circumstantial evidence that she's notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woohookitty (talk • contribs) 10:43, June 8, 2007

She's high rated on a TV dance show? You must be kidding. (Please, tell me you are kidding.)--RandomHumanoid 14:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be civil. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it isn't notable, and just because an article subject isn't popular with young white Western men doesn't mean it deserves scorn. --Charlene 17:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I neither like nor dislike it. I simply think it is irrelevant and certainly not notable. You are free to disagree or point out alternative viewpoints, which is why this page exists. But why on earth would you bring my race and gender into this discussion? --RandomHumanoid 18:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The references are questionable but why split hairs? The person is noticed thus notable by WP standards. In the context of what WP really has become, this is no greater sin than many, and certainly not the worst. --Kevin Murray 16:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose because I think wikipedia's standards are increasingly disappointingly low. IMHO, unnotable TV game show contestants are not worthy of being included in an encyclopedia and do not even remotely satisfy WP:BIO. This dumbing-down of wikipedia needs to stop. See Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information, particularly the long-term historic notability criterion. This girl certainly does not yet have that. --RandomHumanoid 22:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep clearly meets notability guidelines. Capmango 23:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - notability is not inherited so her family connections, while interesting, do not establish her independent notability. If she actually wins the show she's on, then she can have an article. Otto4711 00:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm not sure if I'm actually supposed to vote, given I nominated the article. Nonetheless, I thought I'd make my opinion simply unambiguous.--RandomHumanoid 00:21, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; google news and google news archives makes the subject notable. A merge to Buddy Schwimmer should be considered if she doesnt do well in the TV show. John Vandenberg 00:55, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - fame, importance and popularity are not synonyms for notability. Neither are Google hits. Of course she's going to get a lot of Google hits as one of twenty contestants on a reality show. That does not automatically translate into notability. Slews of reality show contestants have been deleted despite having a bunch of Google hits. Otto4711 02:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Google News does not measure "Google hits." It shows secondary sources, thus establishing notability as defined by the first standard set in WP:BIO. Mal Bad 19:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If you take "fame, importance and popularity" out of the equation, what have you got left? --JJay 19:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. AS a national champion, this individual immediately qualifies for inclusion. --JJay 10:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know anything about the competition in which she won the national youth championship? Is the competition itself noteworthy? I don't think it necessarily provides an obvious metric for measuring her fame. --User:RandomHumanoid^(talk) 21:18, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It appears that RandomHumanoid has some issue here. Seems everyone else is pretty much in agreement. --Mje112 03:48, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accusing the nominator of having "some issue" is not WP:CIVIL and it does not address the concern raised by the nomination, which is that the article's subject does not pass WP:BIO. Otto4711 19:26, 14 June 2007 (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.