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 for now While Wikipedia is not news and most reality show contestants are not inherently notable, this contestant was a finalist who seems to have created a large amount of press. This is essentially a tentative keep. If her album and other results do not result in any later coverage, this close should not be considered a strong precedent against future AfDs. JoshuaZ 20:34, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haley Scarnato (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Delete. Another failed Reality TV contestant. Fails WP:BIO, WP:N etc. Was one of the first to be evicted from the most recent American Idol, he has done nothing noteable before or after her few appearences on the show. The article claims she released an album on iTunes, this is NOT the case. Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 19:20, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I was able to find her EP on ITunes. Are you sure you spelled her name correctly? Besides, there's precedent for keeping anyone who appeared as a finalist. You need a stronger argument to change consensus.Zagalejo 23:26, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Are you referring to consensus that American Idol finalists are notable, or that finalists of any contest are notable? I've nominated articles for deletion based on the argument that finalists aren't notable and succeeded, but none of them were on American Idol. If a separate standard exists, what is the threshold for finalist? To me, finalist isn't the top eight, where Scarnato was eliminated. Also, what's the standard for inclusion on iTunes? Her own article says that her sales rank disappeared almost immediately, and I managed to find this which talks about the sales ranks of various artists. She's not mentioned in any of the lists, which, according to the article, means she "had "negligible" numbers." It is a blog, but the author is on USA Today staff and served as Senior VP & Editor of the music business trade publication Radio & Records. If the woman is memorable only for her appearance on American Idol, doesn't it say something if the American Idol sales machine doesn't remember her?

• Well, I had meant that finalists from American Idol do generally survive AFD discussions. (FYI, the show refers to anyone in the final 12 as a finalist). However, it appears that I am wrong, as season 2 contender Rickey Smith was deleted. So... I'll just drop that line of argument. My ITunes comment was just a way of showing that the nominator didn't do his homework. No, having an album an ITunes is not an automatic pass, but the nominator still has an obligation to report the facts correctly. Zagalejo 01:23, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah. I wasn't sure on that one. Maybe we'll both learn a little more when this picks up a few more opinions. I understand your iTunes comment, though. Consequentially 02:29, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NOT#NEWS] - Only claim to notability is appearance on a TV show Corpx 04:49, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nope. Also the tour which I mentioned below. This is simply premature. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 05:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No importance worthy of inclusionPalX 20:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The notability standard is "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." This standard is met, at the least, by a TV Guide biography and a San Antonio Express-News article. Wide name recognition is also demonstrated by 746 unique Google hits and 33 unique Google News hits. Also, the WP:CONSENSUS of over 100 editors who contributed to this article, who for some reason seem to be missing from this discussion, ought to count for something. DHowell 05:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, DHowell, you've just broken WP:GOOGLE. Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 12:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. You're also reachign at WP:EFFORT. The notability standard bends in different instances, specifically because of things like this. WP:NOT#NEWS cautions us against temporary fame, and consensus has been that only contestants that win or, rarely, who make it to the very last rounds are notable. Scarnato has no lasting commercial value, as sales numbers demonstrate, and didn't make it to the end of the show. Consequentially 16:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry but you can't judge her commercial value right now. I mean. We aren't even at the point where she could sign with a label yet. Saying that she has no commercial value is crystal ball territory. You can't know that. Right now, she's notable. She's on a nationally touring tour. We're not even 3 months removed from the end of the show she was on. I don't get the rush here. And we have mountains of evidence of non-winners who had success post-show. Chris Daughtry anyone? --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 01:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Either keep or redirect to American Idol (season 6). (This comment also applies to the other relevant articles the nominator put up for AfD: Brandon Rogers (singer), Stephanie Edwards (singer), Chris Sligh, and Gina Glocksen.) I believe placement as a finalist as opposed to semifinalist or other contestant in this particular program (the highest ranked show in ratings and viewers in the U.S.) should merit personal notability, because they have been recognized by many TV viewers and they are featured more than the other contestants. You may shoot me for not directly addressing WP:N (the need to demonstrate sources), but the Google test is not the best way to establish non-notability in this instance: TV viewers who saw the contestants within and outside of AI (e.g. talk show appearances), and even the non-voting of these contestants should be taken into account as AI is partly a popularity contest by its nature.

It has only been a few months since this season ended. The nominated people may take 1 or 2 years to develop their career outside of Idol, if they choose to do so. (I do know about WP:CRYSTAL, so I kindly ask not to be chided for that, as these articles do not predict future events as they should not.) For that reason, I would rather wait one year at least to determine if a finalist—not just any contestant—takes advantage of her or his AI experience in order to judge notabilty. Notice also the first nomination for Chris Sligh, which indicated the contestant was notable for being a finalist, albeit during the show's run. (I also know consensus can change, but I am more welcome to discussion on this point.)

I wonder why the nom selected for AfD contestants who came in 8th place or lower. Is placement a criteria that will determine notability and WP:BIO? If it is, 7th place is a pretty arbitrary standard for inclusion in my book.

I am more confident in supporting the redirect, which my comments seem to be better aligned with. For example, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Idol contestants and the redirects to season 6 here, which includes a myriad of person redirects. Merging is obviously out because a TV show article should not have biographies, unless an acceptable subpage is created. TLK^'in 04:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Can we please stop this? Every few months, we get users who decide that we need to nuke as many AI articles as possible. I don't get it. The Idol Wikiproject states that all finalists get a page. We have pages for almost all of the other finalists no matter what position they finish in. This is one of many previous deletion votes on similar issues. The thing is. I make the same point I did back in February and March. Right now, these people are notable. In a year, if they haven't released anything or are no longer notable, then I say yes, let's remove the articles. But until then, this just feels a bit premature. I mean. Folks. The finalists (including Haley) are currently on tour and selling out or selling well at many arenas. That feels pretty notable to me. I'm tired of doing this every 3-4 months. And btw, all of the songs she recorded for the show are indeed available on iTunes whether they are part of an official "EP" or not. See here.--Woohookitty^Woohoo! 05:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Participating in a tour that sells out an arena is notable if it's your tour. Disney on Ice sells out arenas, but we don't have articles about Kettle #4 from the Beauty and the Beast dance number. Scarnato is not touring on her own. Scarnato is not selling out stadiums. Scarnato isn't even generating a lot of sales, as the ITunes sales numbers above point out. So, aside from scraping by into 8th place on American Idol, you can't tell me that she's notable and support it with verifiable references. That's bad. Consequentially 19:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:N states that a subject is notable if they have "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." First of all, a Google search of her name returns over 500,000 results. Secondly, she has received coverage in many reliable sources: Yahoo!, Time magazine, ABC News, Fox News, MSNBC, Entertainment Weekly, MTV, TV Guide, AOL, People, VH1, VH1, IGN, E!, CBS, Associated Press, USA Today, not to include the many other newspapers, magazines, television programs (The Oprah Winfrey Show, Larry King Live, Access Hollywood, Entertainment Tonight, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC), etc she has been featured on. --musicpvm 20:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Idol wikiproject is not guideline or policy Corpx 05:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No but we have a long precedent on it. We have previous AfD votes and all of the previous seasons. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 05:51, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NOTAGAIN. Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 10:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That isn't a policy or guideline either. Essays are not guidelines. There is a long precedent in keeping finalists articles. And even without that, as I've said, Scarnato is still on tour selling out arenas. And she was on the #1 rated show on television. I think I made this point on one of the many previous deletion debates involving American Idol, but to me, this is much like an actor on a hit tv series. We have separate articles on many tv characters outside of their show. How exactly is this different? I can see the arguments here for reality shows like The Next Food Network Star but this is a different animal. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 10:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Why should we delete this entry? She was a top 12 Finalist on a show viewed by hundreds of millions, and toured the country with many of the finalists. Even if she is mostly forgotten a year from now, why should we delete it? Should we delete wikipedia entries about silent movies that most people alive have never seen before? No, we should keep this entry.

• See WP:NOHARM, WP:NOTINHERITED. Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 10:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• As stated above, what you are quoting is not a policy or guideline. Honestly, and this is just my opinion, I don't think that essay even holds as much weight as a WikiProject. It's a personal opinion and nothing else. WikiProject at least has some consensus behind it. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 10:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, notable American Idol finalist. She is also particpating in a notable national tour. --musicpvm 08:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Being a contestant on a Reality TV series does not make one noteable, see WP:BIO and WP:N. Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 10:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• This isn't the typical reality show. And besides, notability outside of the show might not be known for awhile. Look at Mandisa. She just now released her first CD and it's been a year since she was on the show. Well over a year. I just see too much incorrect information and assumptions in your nomination. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 10:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Your argument fails WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. If these subjects become noteable, they deserve their own articles. Until then, they should be deleted and redirected to the American Idol page. Exactly how different is this to other Reality shows? Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 10:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is in no way a policy or guideline; it is a personal essay. The singer also passes WP:MUSIC (#4). --musicpvm 18:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Exactly. What keeps getting quoted is a listing of reasons and that's really all it is. As for this being different from other reality shows, it looks like you might be a Brit? Think of this as The X Factor. Or the UK Big Brother. The winner always ends up with a #1 single or album. The show is the "water cooler" show for the entire time it's on. Even newspapers that avoid reality shows like that plague will have an entire column devoted to the show. And more often than not, the finalists end up being notable for things outside of the show. Jennifer Hudson won an Oscar. The entire top 9 from season 5 except for Ace Young have charted an album on the Billboard charts. Carrie Underwood has been the best selling American artist over the last year or so. It's the most popular show in the US according to the Nielsen ratings. It just simply isn't any other reality show. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 01:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect *sigh* This just keeps popping up so many times its obvious things need to change. This idea has been brought many times and it seems to be the way that works. My proposal is that we list all the finalists and maybe even semi-finalists of every season in one list per season. If they become notable later then an article is created and that's done with. Anyways, for those of us at WP:IDOL we really need a policy or guideline for this. ►Tennis Dynamite◄ 17:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • A guidline already exists. At WP:IDOL, it clearly states "For contestants, it has been decided that only finalists may have their own article. Semi-finalists are redirected to their season's article." The problem is these constant deletion discussions. The finalists are obviously notable. --musicpvm 18:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:IDOL is not a guideline Corpx 01:06, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yep but it's what we've followed for quite some time, guideline or not. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 01:42, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Maybe it should become a guideline or these AFD's will keep coming. Either way these shouldn't be deleted. ►Tennis Dynamite◄ 16:48, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this should be kept. As of right now they are noteable. andre1010

• • Keep. Keep this. She was on the most watched show in America and released an EP that is avaialble on Itunes. She is also included a few American Idol Packages which did in fact make it on the Pop and Overall chart. She isn't unworthy because she is under contract from American Idol right now meaning she can't sign to a label or release any news on if she has. It's too early to tell so I say we keep this until we are proven otherwise. MrRP1234

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.