Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jancey Sheats

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. Proto::► 11:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jancey Sheats

Jancey Sheats (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Image:Sheatskark0spsm.JPG (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (added by closing admin)

Not notable as per WP:N Amnewsboy 23:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Can't see how she is notable --Kevin Murray 09:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• dont delete No news personality is notable, but wiki has tons of bios on them. Jancey Sheats is a person notable to residents in central Arkansas.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.30.129.248 (talk • contribs).

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Quarl ^(talk) 05:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Note: I previously closed this as Delete, but the closure was contested and I admit that consensus was thin (2 delete / 1 keep). To avoid the appearance of bias, I'm extending debate for wider consensus. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-01-02 06:00Z
• Delete. Not notable outside of locality, no assertion of notability. Reads kind of like a fan page for the news personality. --Dennisthe2 06:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete fails WP:BIO by a long way. Gwernol 06:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• As a side note I think the original close as delete was fine, since the only keep opinion did not give a meaningful reason to keep the article. "There are lots of articles that break policy" is never a good reason to allow this article to break policy. Gwernol 06:05, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm pretty sure the original closure would have been endorsed at DRV but I figured it'd be easier to just get five more delete votes so there'd be no argument against a strong consensus. Also I dislike how even though DRV is supposed to be meta-discussion about the procedure of the closure, in practice it's often more of an appeals process where DRV participants voice their own opinions on whether to delete. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-01-02 06:20Z

• Delete non notable fails WP:BIO [1].--Dakota 06:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:LOCAL. --- RockMFR 07:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Quarl? MER-C 08:26, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom.--Unexplainedbacon 14:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep As the author of the page, I of course have a bias. But when I look at other bios for other news anchors or media, what makes them any more important? The fact they work in a larger more popular city as New York? Shall we delete Shepard Smith? I wonder if coming from a unimportant state as Arkansas makes one not as worthy of a bios. I had researched Miss Sheats info and it was not just a simple thrown togethr stub like a lot of wiki entries are. I don't see deletions of articles are that are one line sentences. In the catagory of Television Presenters, some of which are LOCAL news people, here is but a few articles that you must delete if you want to be considered fair and unpartial

Kerri Furey, Jeni Barnett, Pia Guanio, Carlo Rota, Johnny Ginger, Daniela Kosán, Ed Leigh, Alpana Singh. These are but a few in one catagory, you need to be fai on all aspects if you delete some.Kerusso 15:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• For what its worth, having looked at a few of these articles I agree that at least some of them should be deleted on the same grounds as the Jancey Sheats article. Please feel free to nominate those articles for deletion too. That being said we are talking about the Jancey Sheats article here and the question is: does this article meet Wikipedia's standards. The fact that there are other articles that don't meet our standards can never be an excuse to let this article slide. Its only an argument to discuss the deletion of those articles too. Sorry, Gwernol 16:10, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• I may be a fool, but what makes one more notable than another? The info in this article was researched. It is verifable. It was not created by Miss Sheats, so it is not self promoting. It is neutral.Kerusso 16:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Shepard Smith is a national news personality on a national news network; he is not a local news anchor who is known only in one city. It appears, based on your assertion that Smith, Carlo Rota, Daniela Kosán or Jeni Barnett can be considered at all equivalent, that you have a problem grasping the distinction between national and local notability. A personality on a national television service is notable, because he or she is notable to an entire country. But a personality who is only known within one specific city's media market is not notable. Delete. Bearcat 01:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete unless article is properly sourced by the end of this AfD Alf photoman 20:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Sources added Kerusso 21:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Changed to Weak Keep, know TV personalty but as Amnewsboy puts it, there are far to many of them in the US. On the other hand, if one is in the other should be too or all should be deleted Alf photoman 00:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• well others won't be deleted. Seems there is bias towards some and not others. Thank you for your weak keep support Kerusso 15:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment The reason I listed this AfD is, simply put, there are way too many local television personalities in the United States for every single one of them to have a page. Should Jancey's co-anchor have a page? What about their weekend team? All the anchors at the other stations in Little Rock as well? All the other stations in Arkansas? The Southeast? I give credit for the work done on the article, but it's simply not about a notable subject as per WP:BIO -- think of it this way... is somebody in, say, Montana going to know who Jancey Sheats is? Amnewsboy 01:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Point taken, but half the articles in Wikipedia go the route that some, somewhere in this world will not know or care about some subject. We have a very large article on lightsabers. While for some this might be a much needed or interesting article, there are many that couldn't care less and might think it is a waste of time and space. While Jancey might not be popular or known in Montana or Michigan, she is known in Arkansas and Texas. Who's to say people in those states might not want a article on her? We have articles on governors or local politicians that most would have no desire knowing about, but they still exist Kerusso 02:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

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.