Talk:Neil Forrester

message: (Cross-posted to help centralize discussion, after it was pointed out that the Ausburn article contains information about her career beyond TV) If you look at the article on Maggie Ausburn you'll see the only information given about her comes from before or during the show. The stuff before is clearly relevant to some extent (people would have read about it or heard about it during the show). It doesn't describe her life after the show. That's exactly right - it's a correct interpretation of WP:LIVING. The Forrester article will, ultimately, not be kept up to date (unless he becomes notable for something else), and since the non-duplicate  information seems to focus on his post-TV career (for which he is not notable) some axe-wielding is required. Currently the two entries (his biography and his subsection of the show article) are about the same length, which is a silly situation really. Expand his main article by all means, but some of it does need to be cut. The fact that this article wasn't put into :Category:Living people indicates that you hadn't read WP:LIVING, which is one of the most important documents about Wikipedia editing. Hopefully now it's been flagged up to you, you'll be able to take the necessary editorial actions. Maggie Ausburn is actually a good model to follow in this regard, the editors have clearly applied WP:LIVING well. An instance where it is worth talking about post-reality show career would be Jade Goody, where, again, WP:LIVING has been applied well: the distinction is that Goody has remained a major media figure, while Forrester apparently has not. The fact his main website has been shut down is at least an indication he regards himself as a private citizen, not a public character, and we shouldn't go round trawling up information about him that is not relevant to his notability. That's what WP:LIVING is all about. My problem with this article is that once you strip out the stuff that absolutely has to come out, the article is basically a shorter duplicate of the section of article it's been spun off from, which would be odd to say the least! So, expand it if you want to (I have no difficulty with the existence of the article per se, so long as WP:LIVING is stringently applied) but you may wish to trim down his entry on the other page to eliminate as much redundancy as possible (redundant information is just a chance for contradictions or POV forks to emerge and two more things to monitor for vandalism or misinformation). Again, no ill will intended, and I hope my apologies are accepted. TheGrappler 16:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is my belief that the primary interest of someone who comes to wikipedia and looks at an article on this subject is to see what kind of a life this person has lived SINCE the pinnacle of their "fame". None of the information in this article is private; it is posted on a public website. If Forrester ever wanted to live a life out of the public eye - EVER - he should not have gone on a television show. I appreciate your kindness in addressing the issue, but I still feel your actions - and all of your straw man arguments here - are patently wrong. Pacian 04:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Maggie Ausburn]] as an example 

message: This article was again wiped and redirected without explanation or justification. At this point I must insist that if anyone has issue with the existence of this article they must follow Wikipedia procedure by nominating it for deletion or possible redirect. It is up to the community to decide, not an individual. Midnightguinea 07:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Repeat of article wipe-out April 2007