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. Opening a merge discussion on the article's talk page would be encouraged. Regards, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 23:09, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aidan Davis[edit]

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

I don't believe this person is notable enough for inclusion; his notability hinges entirely on reaching the final of Britain's Got Talent and subsequently touring with the finalists, has not done anything unrelated to BGT, his final performance(s) weren't notable enough to warrant inclusion (hell, Hollie Steel got a second chance to perform in the final and she was barely notable enough at the time), and he didn't get a high enough placing in Britain's Got Talent that allows us to confer a sense of automatic notability (which is generally third place) Sceptre ^(talk) 14:59, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, as he is a minor in the jurisdiction he resides, I'd lean to deleting it just per 1E; however, it's not a universally held opinion, thus why I've listed several reasons why he's not really notable. Sceptre ^(talk) 15:00, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A notable performer per WP:ENTERTAINER. It is common for finalists in such major shows to have articles as they receive much press coverage and follow-up gigs, as in this case. No purpose is served by deletion as, at the very least, we would want to direct our readers to some relevant article. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:09, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A purpose is served: he's a minor. For ethical purposes, I don't believe that marginally notable minors should have articles (people like Miley Cyrus or Dakota Fanning should; children who are reality show contestants that have their fifteen minutes shouldn't). And I don't see what part of ENTERTAINER is met; he's only had one significant role in one production; his fanbase is extremely local (as seen by most of the sources being a local paper), and his contributions to entertaining are neither "unique, prolific, or innovative". Sceptre ^(talk) 15:17, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments are counterfactual and personal opinion, rather than policy. The relevant part of WP:ENTERTAINER is "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.". The recent press coverage testifies to his continuing notability as a headline act appearing in multiple shows on stage and screen at multiple venues and times. They report that he starts another tour this spring which will continue to add to his history as a professional entertainer. There is not the slightest case for deleting this article. And for the bogus ethical argument, please see Think of the children. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:44, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any "significant roles" are all related to Britain's Got Talent, and thus I personally treat them as one, or not notable; for example, he's on the show's live tour which all finalists automatically perform. It's not like, say, Callum Francis, who is notable for being in productions unrelated to BGT (hell, all of Francis' television appearances are on a rival network!) And you alleging my argument is a logical fallacy is itself a logical fallacy; we have an ethical commitment to protect living people, marginally notable people, and minors; Davis is all three, and I can personally attest to the effect of unwanted attention on a minor. Sceptre ^(talk) 16:07, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep - as per all Col. Wardens explanations. This article shouldn't even be in AfD and should be closed now. Sceptre is just using it as a platform for a personal belief or opinion and when his user page is taken into consideration, this AfD and his argument could be regarded as possibly bordering on WP:GAME. --Kudpung (talk) 16:23, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Except that, yes, it should be in AfD, because I don't think this person is notable enough for inclusion. And I wasn't aware that the nominator being in ownership of a brain and a good set of morals is a criterion for speedily keeping an article. Sceptre ^(talk) 16:35, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the nominator has now clearly confirmed that his AfD action is based purely on personal conviction and not on the guidelines for notability of Wikipedia articles. The AfD nomination is therefore invalid. For the children...
...you're fucking joking, right? Isn't every AfD brought about by the nominator thinking an article should be deleted? Sceptre ^(talk) 19:43, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...and when, as an admin, you write (links available) utter pornographic filth and totally explicit depravity on the encyclopedia, do you expect your motivations for ethical commitment to protect living people, marginally notable people, and minors by posting this AfD to be taken seriously?--Kudpung (talk) 04:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...yeah, retract that. Now. Sceptre ^(talk) 01:43, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Davis's career since BGT may not be as high profile as Hollie Steel's, but that can't be used as a rationale to delete. Even with the modest success he's had since BGT, he has, in fact been active as a performer independent of BGT, and that is verifiable (by investigating the refs in the article, no less). Radiopathy •talk• 01:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - On my articles for people who appeared on X Factor and BGT, most of them have not survived AfD's, while one has. Davis' career is still rising however since the show ended, appearing at major dance events as included in the article with a reliable source. Agree with Radiopathy above. Hassaan19 (talk) 09:04, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Merge/Redirect with Britain's Got Talent. Doesn't meet WP:ENT by the very terms of the article itself. THF (talk) 14:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect, zero coverage outside BGT. Guy (Help!) 09:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect (without prejudice) per nom, THF and Guy. The subject doesn't appear to be notable as an entertainer in his own right. From the article, at the moment it seems he's got a certain novelty value as "that kid off BGT", but appearing in a notable programme doesn't confer notability. If he pursues the career perhaps one day he'll cross the notability bar, but not yet. EyeSerene^talk 12:37, 25 February 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.