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 redirect to The X Factor. Actually, consensus is to delete, but there are concerns about the attribution of copied material. The redirects can be retargeted to the appropriate subarticle if desired. Sandstein 12:07, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of The X Factor finalists (British series 1)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Per WP:LISTPEOPLE and following on from the American, New Zealand and Polish lists of finalists. - Theses lists of finalists is already available on the show's article for that respective country. Most names do not satisfy the WP:BLP requirements thus do not have inherited notability. There is no need for such low level profiling on separate lists and there is no need for all the finalists' lists of performances which can be found already on the seasons' article. Ajf773 (talk) 10:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages:[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 10:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 10:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete but salvage: the lists do not meet WP:LISTPEOPLE, but the information is reliably sourced and encyclopaedic. Therefore, the information should be salvaged by placing it onto the corresponding series article under the "finalists" section. The redirects for each act (Sam Lavery, Bella Penfold, etc) should also be mended if the deletion goes ahead. – DarkGlow (talk) 10:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have not nominated List of The X Factor (American TV series) finalists nor List of The X Factor (Australian TV series) finalists as these are intended to be summary only articles comprising of all finalists across all series. If a person is non-notable then there is nothing worth salvaging. Ajf773 (talk) 08:31, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, at least salvage the references from the nominated articles to be used on the "list of finalists" articles. They need more verifiability. – DarkGlow (talk) 11:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and no salvage per all recent previous AfD for X Factor and Big Brother seasonal people lists. For this specific batch, as per the previous ones, if a person is notable, they have an article with their bio already written there, if they aren't notable, then their bio is a non-notable trivia piece of information which should be deleted. Looking at the example DarkGlow gave above for Sam Lavery, while On 19 May 2017, Lavery released her debut single, "Walk Away".[17] On 13 October 2017, she released her second single "Beat of You", followed by "For the Night" and "Bad Boys" in 2018. In 2019, she released her new single "What You Do". is sourced, it's about a non-notable person (no article) releasing non-notable songs (no articles) and is sourced to a non-notable site (CelebMix, no article). The list at The X Factor (British series 13)#Finalists has enough information about these people, and the entire article has enough information about who reached what part. --Gonnym (talk) 13:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:41, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:13, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Gonnym. Kerberous (talk) 09:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, so long story short, this is a really messy deletion. I did due diligence before processing the deletion and it looks like there are many articles that were split from this list content, many of which are not noted in the talk page or edit history (i.e., they are unattributed splits). Per Wikipedia's cc-by-sa license, any text that was split elsewhere must retain its edit history for attribution purposes. This makes these lists much better candidates for redirection to their respective series articles, preferable over outright deletion unless someone checks that the content was indeed not split out from to any child article. (not watching, please ((ping))) czar 02:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you give an examples? --Gonnym (talk) 08:01, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Czar: Pinging the user, as they said to do. – DarkGlow (talk) 11:45, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per Gonnym's excellent summary. If there is found to be a genuine need to protect edit history ~~– which I think there is not; a list of names of participants in a TV show is unlikely to hit the threshold of originality –~~ then they can be redirected instead. This is not a keep vote. Stifle (talk) 08:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated these articles after every other List of finalists .. lists in other reality series were also deleted. This bundle is the last of them. All articles that redirected to those other lists were deleted subsequently. Most aren't split offs, they're redirect targets with no history worth salvaging. Per WP:BLP we should not keep biographies of persons that don't meet the criteria, including having them in list articles. Ajf773 (talk) 09:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is absolutely correct. (And good work, by the way.) - David Gerard (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Looks like a clear consensus for deletion, but the attribution concerns raised by @Czar: mean that a different solution is needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this variety of article is a chronic and ongoing BLP hazards, and routinely go into tremendous detail about non-notable people, sourced to awful tabloid sources. (Also, I think consensus is pretty clear already, and the deletion doesn't need repeated relisting) - David Gerard (talk) 10:55, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As Czar hasn't responded to two different pings, I have no idea what pages he saw that were an issue. From those that I've looked at, I don't see any copying of information and as I've said above, any bio section in the article should almost certainly be deleted anyways. --Gonnym (talk) 17:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to related series articles. Expanding from my post above, examples of unattributed splits:

Honey G was copied from British series 13

Jason Owen was copied from Australia series 4

Olly Murs from British series 6

Nathaniel Willemse from Australia series 4

Samantha Jade from Australia series 4

Dani Im from Australia series 5

This is tricky because the articles active circa 2010 have lots of successive edits and are a wild west of attribution, while it's clearer for later series articles. I could go deeper but quite literally every subarticle I check is an unattributed split. It's not that the deletion argument doesn't make sense (it does) but that when doing due diligence, WP's licensing makes these articles better candidates for redirection simply for administrative attribution requirements. czar 01:36, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can only assume that content from the articles up for deletion were shifted to other BLP articles where an article for the finalist does exist (as several became notable either on the show, or outside of it). Ajf773 (talk) 10:32, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for clarifying that. Then do whatever policy dictates I guess. My only concern with redirecting is that someone will come along and revert the redirect (and it's obviously going to happen) which will probably go unnoticed. --Gonnym (talk) 13:15, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Couldn't the redirects be protected in some way? – DarkGlow (talk) 13:37, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes, redirects can be protected like any other article, should an AFD ending "redirect" be reverted - David Gerard (talk) 20:03, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In any case I will support a redirect where the redirect is edit protected. Ajf773 (talk) 21:31, 25 May 2020 (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.