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 speedy keep. I withdraw my nomination (non-admin closure) CTJF83 chat 19:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Jeopardy! contestants[edit]

List of Jeopardy! contestants (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Most of the contestants aren't going to be notable and if they are, and have their own page, Category:Jeopardy! contestants would be better. 8,800+ episodes equals 26,000 contestants, minus winners, so rough guess of 15-20,000 total contestants. CTJF83 chat 19:39, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as creator. This was suggested by several users in various Jeopardy! contestant deletion discussions, and in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Lowenthal, the closer suggested a merge to "create a list of important contensants that don't otherwise support a stand-alone article." Nearly all the contestants nominated were found to satisfy WP:GNG; the concerns involved were WP:BLP1E for some borderline contestants, and moving them to this article would make it no longer a biography of an individual person but rather a collection of events (noteworthy Jeopardy! appearances by various contestants). RJaguar3 | u | t 19:56, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is the inclusion criteria on this page? Non-trivial coverage? So there could be thousands of people on here? CTJF83 chat 19:57, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:GNG RJaguar3 | u | t 20:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I mean for you to include a contestant on this page...just passes GNG? So, like I said, there could be thousands listed here. CTJF83 chat 20:37, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This would seem an equitable solution to the problem with individual contestant pages. I hardly think that the danger of "thousands" of entries is likely; very few Jeopardy! players have the sort of reliably sourced coverage that the current examples possess. Serpent's Choice (talk) 21:07, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would a rename to List of notable Jeopardy! contestants be warranted? I could live with that, and end the AfD... I was just concerned with how many people would be listed with this generic title. CTJF83 chat 22:27, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- Marcus Qwertyus 23:22, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as an appropriate merge target for other Jeopardy! contestants who've received coverage, but not to the level of meriting their own articles. No, we don't need to rename it to "notable", just make sure the content meets V and we'll be fine, per Wp:NNC. Jclemens (talk) 23:33, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep but I would prefer to define the scope of the list. It is impossible to have a complete list with all the participants, but if this list were to be renamed List of notable Jeopardy! contestants or something like List of highest winning Jeopardy! contestants with a threshold set around 100k it would be better. Nergaal (talk) 01:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I would've voted delete, except that this is now the only place sourced information on author/notable individual Mark Lowenthal is available on Wikipedia since Sotto's successful AfD of Mark Lowenthal. The closing admin of that AfD explicitly noted that the content here from that page might be merged to a page like this one. Robert K S (talk) 03:26, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Useful filing drawer that will come in handy as a merge target for the objects of the inevitable stream of challenges about the inevitable stream of articles about non-notable or barely notable gameshow contestants. Carrite (talk) 15:42, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Nomination rationale practically invalidates itself. This article is a compromise so that we don't have hundreds of Jeopardy contestant articles. This is a completely appropriate list under the current guidelines Vodello (talk) 16:28, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 21 October 2010 (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.