Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celia Ammerman

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. No consensus to delete, good arguments for both keeping and redirecting. IMO the arguments for keeping are slightly stronger (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Celia Ammerman

The subject, Ammerman, is apparently notable for appearing on America's Next Top Model, Cycle 12 and the BIO is an extended recap of her appearance on the show. Lack of notability could be classified as WP:ONEEVENT. The article is well sourced, but the sources seem to be mostly supporting trivia about Ammerman. This article was originally a redirect and was recently expanded into a full article. I personally recommend reverting back to a redirect and merging any useful material into America's Next Top Model, Cycle 12. Plastikspork (talk) 04:54, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It would be a bit difficult to merge info that isn't already in the episode recaps simply because ANTM cycle articles don't usually have a section on contestants' backgrounds. And it would be difficult to merge info into the master contestant list because it's sprawling as it is. Should we consider creating contestant lists for each cycle for this kind of stuff, or would that be too much? (On the plus side of that argument, at least there would be some info on contestants deemed non-notable for Wikipedia inclusion on each cycle. On the other hand, it's a lot of work to do well.) SKS (talk) 05:04, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I feel this page should be deleted. Far too much information about her Next Top Model experience which is not important and already recapped on the cycle 12 page, plus she has done nothing else of note. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.154.102.195 (talk) 07:44, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There are sufficient secondary sources to justify article. Also contains information about her beyond the show itself (although I would not be adverse to the idea of shortening the ANTM part of the article). Further, article is still in early stages, more post-show fashion career info will be added as it becomes available. Articles about such contestants such as this are not uncommon and, although that alone of course doesn't justify keeping the article, I think it should not be deleted just to be on the safe side. — Hunter Kahn _(contribs) 05:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I may be without Internet access for a few days, so I wanted to just toss these two cents out before I go. I know I may be fighting a losing battle here and this page will probably get deleted, but I did want to say that first of all, I feel WP:ONEEVENT should pertain more to examples like some schmoe from Anytown, USA having one newspaper article written about him, not a contestant in a national television show. That being said, Ammerman admittedly isn't all that notable compared to Tyra Banks or someone like that, but really, what's the harm in having a page about her? If someone decides they want to randomly look up Celia Ammerman, or Amis Jenkins, or Jael Strauss, or whoever, is Wikipedia really worse off for having an article about those people? I would argue the encyclopedia is better for it, so I'd say screw it and let the article stay. But again, just my opinion... — Hunter Kahn _(contribs) 14:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If the decision is 'redirect', which I personally feel is a reasonable choice, then the old version would be saved in the edit history and as soon as Ammerman has gained some notability as a model (outside of ANTM), then the article could be revived with this new information. I could give examples of such ANTM contestants, but I'm sure you have seen them. If the decision is a strong delete, which I seriously doubt it will be, then it should be userfied so it can be revived when new information surfaces. I certainly don't think your hard work should be completely deleted and thank you for your efforts. Plastikspork (talk) 15:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy redirect All top model contestants have at least a redirect to their respective cycles, So their is no reason for there to be an AfD for this Article. It should be immediately edited to a redirect, and discussed on it's talk page. ... MistyWillows ^talk 17:46, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article appears adequately referenced. Ford MF (talk) 20:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I originally created it as redirect when User:Ryan Postlethwaite re-created non-notable contestants as a redirect and I tagged it at RFD as the list of redirects to delete. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 08:44, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article is adequately referenced, including discussion of the subject beyond personal trivia. I also agree with Hunter Kahn's point about the entry. Wikipedia is better for having it in the event that the individual becomes a subject of interest. Given that she was perceived to be a top contender by the cited sources on a largely watched national televised competition, I'd say the chances of that happening are high.Luminum (talk) 21:27, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:05, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong redirect. Yes there are plenty of references, but for what? These references appear to be mostly justification about how people thought she would do well on a reality television show which she did not win. She may very well become a notable model in the future, in which case I would support this article being recreated. As PS said, a redirect would preserve this page history. Symplectic Map (talk) 01:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've already said my piece (peace?) on this above, but I did want to note that Ammerman has already been featured in a style photo-shoot for New York Post, so it seems that she does have a modeling career right now, rather than being simply an "ex-contestant". I don't know if this makes a difference to you guys, but I wanted to toss it out there for your consideration. Additionally, there have also been a number of new interviews and articles about her recently (here and here, for example) that I plan to incorporate into the article either tonight or tomorrow... — Hunter Kahn _(contribs) 01:44, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Im all for keeping this article. Ammerman might not be the most important person in the history of the world, but the page is well written, well sourced and someone has clearly put in a lot of effort when making it. Celia Ammerman also performed strongly on America's Next Top Model, and whilst im not at all suggesting every contestant on the show gets their own page, I think narrowly missing out on the final is a pretty big achievement when you consider how many people apply. Contestants who place 12th on American Idol get their own page, and to be honest I would say that the quality of this article is far superior to the likes of Jasmine Murray. I think it'd be a bit unfair to remove this well written page, when other reality show contestants who didnt have such a strong run in their respective programme get to keep theirs. Alternatly, I would propose a new page with information about all the contestants from this series of Top Model, and put this information under a subcategory for Ammerman. The article is a good one - it'd be a shame for it to have been done in vain. (Kyleofark (talk) 21:37, 13 May 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Strong keep – I don't see a problem with the article as-is, provided there is no BLP violations, which I don't see any. Otherwise, it's reliably sourced. MuZemike 00:31, 14 May 2009 (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.