Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flawless (Dance Group)

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 no consensus. Flowerparty^☀ 00:32, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flawless (Dance Group)

WP:1E and WP:NOTNEWS. Otterathome (talk) 13:12, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Britain's Got Talent (series 3) or something like or something like Britain's Got Talent finalists (series 3). About the same proportion of people watched the final in the UK as watch the Superbowl in America, a description of the finalists would seem to be relevant to a description of the show and I don't see why verifiable information shouldn't be included somewhere when available. Guest9999 (talk) 14:40, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge as above. There's no reason for this verifiable information to be stricken from the site for such an encyclopedic topic. Umbralcorax (talk) 14:52, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above, not notable outside the competition yet. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 15:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete didn't place anywhere in the final. Not notable for anything else. Sceptre ^(talk) 22:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete until the group has any significance outside Britain's Got Talent. J Milburn (talk) 16:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Again. Sigh. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:19, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Good notability as evidenced by the numerous sources. 1E is not relevant because they have made and continue to make multiple performances which attract separate independent coverage and they are no longer low profile. NOTNEWS is not relevant as that guideline is intended for mundane matters like weather reports and traffic accidents, not artists with international notability. Deletion is uterrly inappropriate as, at the very least, we would retain the title as a useful search term. And the edit history should be retained regardless as deleting it would contravene the licence. Colonel Warden (talk) 20:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- They are not "artists with international notability", they are contestants on a game show. Artists with international notability are known for more than just appearing on a game show, and receive coverage for what they're doing that is not coverage of the game show. Even if kept as a search term, there is no need to retain the history unless the content is merged somewhere. J Milburn (talk) 10:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the Los Angeles Times which reports Flawless getting a movie contract. This disposes of both of your complaints so now change your !vote, please. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:59, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any sources that say they have even started production yet? We also don't know how major or minor their role is. So that is very WP:CRYSTAL. It also doesn't help that they are trivial mentions either.--Otterathome (talk) 11:55, 7 June 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.