This article was nominated for deletion on 21 February 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was Keep.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music
I've used an article from mjsbigblog.com as a reference in this article. I should note that the website is not hosted by blogspot.com or wordpress, and running the website is (or at least was at one point) a full time job for MJ Santilli - who is the author of most articles on the site. Santilli and her site were actually the subjects of this article from The Boston Globe. [1] Even more significantly though, she used to write articles about American Idol for The New York Post (see here - http://nypost.com/author/m-j-santilli/) So she is certainly an "established expert" in her field. --Jpcase (talk) 19:23, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Whether she is supposed to an expert or not is of no significance, it's only a blog, and she has published things on her site which were later shown to be false. Hzh (talk) 02:30, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia has no problem with blogs if it can be shown that the website is written by an established expert in the field. But could you provide an example of misinformation that has been published on the site? --Jpcase (talk) 14:38, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This story here for example, claiming that the finale will be moved to New York. Completely untrue. The blog-based rumors resulted in other sites repeating the news e.g. here. I certainly remember many more rumors passed off as news on that site, it is a site responsible for spreading some false rumors, it is not a reliable site. Hzh (talk) 14:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That story was based on what appeared to MJ Santilli to be an official press release for the show. Did she jump the gun a bit in publishing it? Yeah, I guess. But she quickly published a story correcting the mistake [2], which to me, shows that she maintains pretty good oversight for the blog. Even professional publications have bad leads from time to time. --Jpcase (talk) 15:21, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's unreliable because she did not, or could not, check. She did not jump the gun, she published false information passed on to her. News outlets have processes for checking information, and she simply doesn't have the manpower to do it. I understand it is a popular site, but popular doesn't mean reliable, and she relies mostly on fans passing on information to her. There is also a difference between her as an "expert" and her site as a news site - it is fine to cite her opinion (although as I said below, opinions should be only used in the proper context, and frankly I see no instance where Jess's performance is worth adding critics' opinion), but her site is not a reliable news site. Also correcting 5 days later is not considered fast. Hzh (talk) 16:02, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop giving blow by blow account of a contestant's performance or what so-called Idol-expert think. Such treatment is not suitable in Wikipedia. Also please avoid trivia like who rooms with whom, this is outside of what is considered encyclopedic content. Please write only what is significant and in a neutral manner. If you are a fan of Jessica Meuse, please note that this is not a fan site, and this is not the place to tell us how wonderful other people think she is. Hzh (talk) 02:27, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am a fan of Meuse, but it was never my intention to violate WP:NPOV. At first, I had included both positive and negative comments from the judges and commentators (there's no reason to question their authority on this subject; TVLine, Entertainment Weekly, Yahoo! - these are professional publications) for each of Meuse's performances. I had never written an article on a reality show contestant before, and this seemed like a reasonable way to go about it, given the considerable amount of significant coverage that American Idol and its contestants receive in reliable sources. I understood your concern that what I had written went too in-depth though, so I trimmed it down a lot. If you feel that what I had was still to in-depth, then that's fine. I appreciate your feedback. I still kind of feel like it would be worth mentioning who she roomed with. At the very least, her friendship with Majesty Rose should be mentioned in the "Personal life" section. --Jpcase (talk) 14:36, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiepedia is not a collection of trivia per WP:INDISCRIMINATE, and should not be over-detailed in a person's biography per WP:NOTDIARY. We would only mention that she is friend with Majesty Rose (and how they came to be friends) IF they had collaborated on a project which produced something significant, for example a single. The opinion of an outside reviewer or a judge is only significant when there are good reasons to include it, for example when something is particularly note-worthy or controversial. Run of the mill review of a performance should never be included. Also note that the table already summarized the performances, so there is no need to mention them unless there is something particularly worth noting. Articles on some Idol contestants' time on Idol are excessive, the worst is Jessica Sanchez, and that needs serious trimming (and it had already been trimmed, it was even worse before). In some pages, the American Idol section could be expanded, but the one that has a reasonable balance in the American Idol section is David Cook, although personally I'd trim a bit more. Hzh (talk) 15:40, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for giving me a better sense of how to approach this kind of article. It seems strange to me though, that the close relationship between two public figures isn't notable enough on its own to be mentioned in the "Personal life" section of an article. Has an actual consensus ever been established for viewing this kind of information as trivial? --Jpcase (talk) 16:21, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Jess has mentioned in a few interviews that she and Majesty plan to collaborate on a project in the future. Sure, there's a good chance it will never happen, but future career plans (and unrealized career plans) are mentioned in articles all the time. I'm not saying that just because other articles do it, means that it should be done, but this kind of information seems fairly noteworthy to me. Do you object? --Jpcase (talk) 16:34, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You can certainly try phrasing her friendship with Majesty Rose in terms of what they are doing (e.g. writing songs together), and see if people object to it. There is no guarantee of what people will delete, many people on Wikipedia don't even consider Majesty Rose or indeed Jessica Meuse to be significant public figures, and would happily delete their pages if they can. I'm also pretty sure if you look enough, you can find instances of friends being listed on some Wikipedia biographies, people simply haven't got round to deleting those trivia. Some would delete information on girlfriend/boyfriend or other very close relationship as well. Having some kind of professional relationship between them would certainly help to keep the content in the page. Hzh (talk) 17:03, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, if I add it, then somebody else might want to delete it later on down the road. That's always a possibility with anything added to an article. I certainly know that some people don't view Idol contestants as notable figures. There's already been a deletion discussion for this year's Top 13, and it was settled in favor of keeping the articles. So, if you're fine with me adding this information, then I'll go ahead and do so. --Jpcase (talk) 17:51, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's fine with me as long as it's not too detailed (a couple of sentences would be sufficient). I only started removing content from this page and others because they got excessive, it's something I should have done with the Jessica Sanchez page when I might still want to read it, now I get a headache just to look at it. Hzh (talk) 18:03, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
