|
Does Sasha Velour actually meet Wikipedia's requirements for notability? Because I don't think she does. Being on the show and being on a single does not mean she's notable. Oath2order (talk) 17:18, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- I can see a fair bit of coverage in WP:RS in a GNews search, so I'm pretty sure that the "significant coverage" condition of WP:BIO is met here. Uncle Roy (talk) 17:42, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- +1 ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:40, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
@Oath2order: I turned this back into a stub, but included the AfD tag per your other nominations. Please don't see this as edit warring -- I am simply trying to group this one with the others. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:02, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- This one has already had a discussion determine that it should be a redirect. Please reopen the discussion on Articles for Undeletion I think it is. Oath2order (talk) 16:09, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Oath2order: I'm disappointed you won't give this article a chance, or even let it be included in the group nomination. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:17, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- I have told you numerous times that if you want this article to have a chance, reopen the discussion via the process on Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. Oath2order (talk) 16:40, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
@Feminist: I am coming to you, per Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion, before going to Wikipedia:Deletion review. I believe this individual is notable. Yes, I see the result of this discussion, but I'd like editors to be given a chance to expand this article. Velour is not known just for being a reality show contestant, and the existence of Draft:Sasha Velour and Draft:Sasha Velour (drag queen) serve as evidence that editors are trying to work on the article. I tried turning this page into a stub and included the AfD template to group Velour's article as part of this nomination, but the redirect was restored despite my plea on this talk page. Do you have any thoughts or suggestions? ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:50, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- If you think the article should have been kept, you should have commented at the AfD discussion. I think DRV is your best bet now. RFD does not usually consider whether a deleted topic may be notable. feminist 01:24, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- To qualify for a standalone article, a person needs to be shown and sourced as notable for more than just the fact of appearing on a reality show — and no, the routine coverage that every contestant on a reality show always gets while the season is under way is not enough to demonstrate notability. To be eligible for a Wikipedia article because reality show per se, a person has to win the tiara at the end — non-winning competitors can still become notable for other reasons after the season has ended (e.g. Alaska Thunderfuck cleared WP:NMUSIC for releasing an album), but they are not automatically entitled to articles just for the fact of being on a reality show in and of itself.
- For starters, you say that Sasha Velour was already notable enough for an article for other reasons independent of her participation in RPDR9 — but in the form in which you created it, the article neither stated nor sourced any other notability claim besides RPDR9. And of the two drafts listed in the next discussion, one is virtually identical to the article in dispute here, and the longer and more detailed one sources its other notability claims almost entirely to Tumblrs and Blogspots and other primary sources, not to reliable source coverage in media for anything other than RPDR9. So neither of those drafts is in any way an improvement over what's present but not cutting it here. Bearcat (talk) 16:22, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- Alright, well I think the subject meets notability criteria, but I've spent too much time lately (mostly on Trump-related articles) swimming upstream just to save articles. If editors don't feel inclined to help expand this article, I'm not going to invest my time either. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:38, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- I think after winning Season 9 she definitely merits having a page. This comes in addition to recent large magazine coverage such as in Cosmopolitan, Vice and others. - Distancesarewhite —Preceding undated comment added 12:02, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, obviously things have now changed. Please note that the discussion you're responding to was initiated six weeks before, and ended about three weeks before, the season's final winner was announced — the discussion concluded correctly at the time, and circumstances changed afterward. That happens sometimes. Bearcat (talk) 22:18, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for your note. I did notice that the conversation happened some time ago, but when I made my comment no article existed, only the drafts. As I started making a full article, I decided to leave my comment for fullness and transparency - hope that's ok, I'm fairly new to editing, so please advise on a better approach for the future, I'm always looking to improving my skills, communication and editing alike. Speaking of improving, perhaps we can move this discussions to ways to improve the article. One problem that seems present in many other drag queen pages too is consistent pronoun use. Since Sasha is also genderfluid and articles about Sasha have mixed pronoun use, I'm not sure what the suitable use here is. Distancesarewhite(talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:49, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
|
