Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jackiey Budden (2nd nomination)

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 delete. Stifle (talk) 09:33, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jackiey Budden

I think this can probably go now, as the previous AfD suggested. This poor woman is only known for one thing: being the mother of Jade Goody. If that wasn't bad enough, she's been dragged around after Jade in a sort of "famous for being nearly famous" mother and daughter roadshow, but there is nothing of substance in the few sources that is not intimately bound to Jade's "career". I don't believe we'd even have an article if it wasn't for her rather unwise decision to appear on "celebrity" big brother with her daughter. Due to the nature of the sources it is virtually impossible to have an article about this individual which does not belittle her. Enough, please. WP:BLP and human decency suggest this should be nuked or perhaps very slightly merged to Jade Goody. Guy (Help!) 22:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:08, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't you just redirect it? (I.e. why is this at AFD?) 160.39.213.152 (talk) 22:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The rationale behind having an article for Jackiey is that she was notable for more than one thing. Consider other Big Brother contestants. Obviously most Big Brother contestants would not get a wikipedia article because they aren't notable outside Big Brother, and so they get a subentry on the main Big Brother page. However, Jackiey's article existed for some time before it was announced she was going on Big Brother documenting her biography and TV appearances. Furthermore, seeing as she was involved in an international furore regarding her time in the house, I believe that this makes her notable enough to have her own page.

The article should not belittle Jackiey and editors should be circumspect about what they say when updating this page. Other editors have the right to remove things as they see fit. There have been times where I have editted out bias in the article but other contributors should help out too. Technohead1980 (talk) 09:54, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete on the basis of BLP policy. Tabloid fodder. The BBC article is about her daughter, and barely mentions her. DGG (talk) 01:35, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for once in my life I think I'm finding myself agreeing with DGG on something. Miracles never cease. JBsupreme (talk) 07:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:BIO. Schuym1 (talk) 22:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it fails WP:BIO and WP:N Ijanderson (talk) 22:56, 27 January 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.