Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miskel Spillman (2nd nomination)

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. I guess the SNL argument has helped push the consensus for a keep JForget 00:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Miskel Spillman[edit]

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

WP:BLP#1E. Person has no significance for inclusion beyond one event. Event itself is not probably notable enough for an article, its one contestant isn't. Sources included do not meet threshold of multiple, reliable, significant commentary on subject. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 18:44, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Saturday Night Live (season 3) as a likely search term. Subject of this article only notable for one event and has no significance beyond it. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 20:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Disagree with reasons given for deletion. Sahasrahla (talk) 05:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- ...How so? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 21:16, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Well-written, well-laid-out article on person of interest. I would love to know more about non-snl parts of her life, but there are reliable sources and citations for the data included thus far. Centerone (talk) 16:00, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect to Saturday Night Live (season 3) per Doc Strange. Clear case of one event. --Nuujinn (talk) 17:11, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:45, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As the only non-celebrity to host SNL, Miskel Spillman is, for obvious reasons, part of every history of the show that I have ever read, and SNL-ophiles recognize her name as the old lady who won the "anyone can host" contest that ran but once in the show's 35 year history. Although I recognize that a redirect to the season article would serve the purpose of keeping her as a blue link and making a note of the fact that she was one of the hosts in the 1977-78 season, the reason that anyone would consult the article would be to find more details than might be evident from a mention on a list of hosts. I suspect that if she did get a mention in the season 3, anything that didn't fit into a sentence would ultimately be edited out for the sake of neatness. Ultimately, Wikipedia is a reference, and the article serves that purpose. Mandsford (talk) 12:56, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That does not address whether it deserves a standalone article; merging is an editorial decision, and how much is kept or cut is easily decided. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:00, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The separate article allows more detail (Spillman's dates of birth and death, her ancestry, her much later interview in People magazine) than would be appropriate for the SNL season 3 article. Kellysor (talk) 15:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some additional comments: Every other SNL host has a page of their own. While a number of things relate back to the SNL hosting in relation to her notability, it was not just the case of "she hosted SNL" or "she won an SNL contest" (note: she beat out 150,000 folks in an essay contest, not just a sweepstakes..) but she also held the record of the oldest SNL host for OVER _three decades_! In addition, lots of people have their own pages for "only one event." A good example might be pretty much all the people who are simply listed because of their longevity. If you check oldest people you can find a number of people who only have pages of their own because they are, or were, old. I'm also pretty certain that you could probably find hundreds (if not more) of other examples of people who have pages only because of their participation in one event, whatever that event was. Centerone (talk) 18:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please Keep Her role on SNL that year was a cultural significance. There are many people who get their 15 minutes of fame and are forgotten but to many people this was more than significant. She still deserve to keep those 15 minutes eternally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.209.68.186 (talk) 12:48, 8 May 2010 (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.