Kim Spradlin: Everything else she has done since seems resume-building, not indication of notability, and probably fan-titillating.  The Jeopardy reference is just mere reference to her One World win.  Should be redirected to either (preferably) Survivor: One World or (alternatively) List of Survivor (American TV series) contestants .  If WP:BLP1E doesn't apply, how about WP:BIO1E or WP:PAGEDECIDE instead?  George Ho ( talk ) 03:10, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Businesspeople , Women ,  and Television .  George Ho ( talk ) 03:10, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 03:44, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:20, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep or Merge – WP:BIO1E does present a strong case for removal.  However, there is one source, Southern Living , that is about her work as an interior decorator.  This feature article a top-ten (non-celebrity) magazine suggests that she is moving toward notability for other things.  Other coverage of her marriage, false arrest, and pregnancy are not related to the television show and indicate that her celebrity has continued beyond the show, especially given that these articles are from major media.  It is challenging to deal with people who are famous for being famous, but there is a demand for reliable content on these individuals in Wikipedia.  My biggest push back on WP:BIO1E is that she is known for not just one television show but for two shows.  Although both are part of the Survivor franchise, Survivor: One World and Survivor: Winners at War are treated as two different shows within Wikipedia.  And the Survivor: Winners at War is where an issue emerges—almost all of the cast members of this show have a stand-alone Wikipedia article; all are similarly notable for being a winner of a prior season of a Survivor franchise show.  I looked at a few of these articles; they had fewer sources and less post-show coverage than Spradlin, again indicating that her celebrity goes beyond the show.  That being said, I do think the best solution for all of these Survivor-related bio articles is to merge a trimmed bio into the television shows' article.  Because merging would be part of a bigger project and might take longer than the duration of this deletion discussion, more time is needed and is reasonable.  I do not write about contemporary celebrities and do not watch Survivior , but have edited reality television show articles for the GOCE .  Normally, there is a short bio for each contestant within the article for each season.  However, short bios are not part of the Survivor: One World or Survivor: Winners at War articles.  So, the redirect that I would normally support, would only take someone to the barest of details; content the searcher most likely already knows because they are searching for Spradlin.  I support a merge vs. a redirect because there is content and related sources here that will add value to another article and would be lost with a redirect.  If the decision is made to keep rather than merge this article, it needs a major copy edit.  I have gone ahead and flagged it for this.  Rublamb ( talk ) 16:05, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The two "shows" you refer to are Survivor seasons.  Some returnees who appeared in Winners at War have been redirected to their own winning seasons due to their lack of notabilities outside their own winning seasons.  Why must we preserve info about "her marriage, false arrest, and pregnancy", especially at the cost of enforcing WP:BLP ?  Even returnees' family info didn't save such articles from being redirected.  Furthermore, I don't see her notability as an interior decorator verified by multiple sources other than Southern Living .  Must we include and preserve every info about her to justify keeping this article?  I don't see any info that is relevant and valuable to Survivor: One World .  George Ho ( talk ) 18:51, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Oh, and regarding "would be lost with a redirect", the info about this person won't be lost (unless servers would mess up deleted pages?).  Just historical revisions shall suffice, shan't they?  George Ho ( talk ) 18:56, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: I stand corrected on seasons vs. two shows and will strike that above.  I am not saying there is a need for overly detailed information about her marriage and pregnancy in the article and have indicated a need for a comprehensive edit.  Rather, the coverage of such life events by mainstream media helps define her as a celebrity vs. a one-off reality television show participant.  There is a tipping point between the two; the Southern Living article stands out in this regard.  When I referred to information being lost, I specifically meant inaccessible to the people who come to Wikipedia for information—because deleted articles are removed from Wikipedia and Internet search results.  In terms of what might be valuable in a merge, a general bio might include where a contestant is from, their occupation, and any personal details that were significant in how they played the game.  Photos are also included.  Because this is one of many Survivor participant articles that would need to be deleted based on the criteria outlined in your nomination, it is simpler to treat this as a comprehensive merger project that would not necessarily require discussion for every article.  I have previously merged articles that fell under BIO1E without complaints; the key is that valuable content is retained while the questionable article goes away.  Rublamb ( talk ) 19:40, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] In terms of what might be valuable in a merge, a general bio might include where a contestant is from, their occupation, and any personal details that were significant in how they played the game.  That's something that Fandom can do, can't it?  inaccessible to the people who come to Wikipedia for information—because deleted articles are removed from Wikipedia and Internet search results.  I apppreciate your concerns about effects on accessibility, but being removed from search results doesn't mean info is valuable.  Sometimes, being part of search engine results, like Google, is more like... clickbait ?  Regarding merger, I don't see any Survivor season article containing a mini-bio of its winner, do I?  When a winner was redirected, no info about such winner was merged into the season article, and relevant info about contestants, including winners, have already been included only as long as the info is relevant to the specific season.  George Ho ( talk ) 20:07, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Response: My recommendations are based on articles for other reality television shows where the contestants do not have their own articles.  Clearly, the contestant's background info is not included in the Survivor articles because someone expanded that content into a secondary article.  When deciding between partially merging or deleting in this instance, we should consider what is wanted by and/or helpful to users of Wikipedia; what is included in Fandom is irrevelant.  As discussed in WP:WPINWA , Wikipedia has a different role from Fandom and includes sources for its content.  While some content in this article should be trimmed and is better suited for Fandom, it also includes basic details could be helpful to understanding the televison show and the dynamics between cast members.  Let's see what other's think.  Rublamb (talk) 21:02, 4 November 2023 (UTC) Rublamb ( talk ) 21:04, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, RL0919 ( talk ) 13:18, 11 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:46, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Subject (barely) notable for one event , an exemplary case of that kind.  And the fact that the main curators of the text are kamikaze accounts truly does not help.  - The Gnome ( talk ) 13:32, 26 November 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: redirect