The result of the debate was keep. Results counted: Keep: 11, Delete: 3. All other votes were disregarded as sockpuppet votes, and/or personal attacks. → Fir e Fox 17:13, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:BIO. Is ordinary member of public taking part in a game show - would create massive headache for precedent if all such public members were allows articles. Is not notable under Wiki rules and has been instructed to lie about celeb/notable status on screen. doktorb | words 21:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep no less notable than several other TV personalities. Already several participants on "ordinary" BB have entries. She is more than just an ordinary member of the public making a transitory appearance on a game show. Whether she succeeds or fails, her case raises some significant questions about the nature of celebrity, and (along with the recent Space Cadets programme, the line between fiction and reality on programmes like this. PatGallacher 22:14, 7 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep As above. Englishrose 22:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Advice could be argued as deletion as she is not famous. However, reports that the page will cause legal problems are untrue, the page is for information only, and any deletion of the page claiming to be for legal reasons in vandalism. However, contestants on regular BB have had pages created, and she is certainly going to be known for her appearance, particularly as it is the first of it's kind. However, I am not willing to either argue for or against the deletion, i just want to give advice. Mikeroberts 14:26, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Strong Keep as per PatGallacher Jcuk 23:39, 7 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep Being on Big Brother in the first place at least makes her well known. Keeno 00:00, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep Indeed she is only a participant in a game show, but the voting record for BB is in the millions and she has already got dozens of column inches in the British tabloids (which contributes to one of the criteria). On her exit various magazines and newspapers will be willing to give her thousands for interviews & pictures, at least one photoshoot for FHM or equivalent would be more or less guaranteed (more contribution to the same critera). By the nature of BB as a gameshow & it's populatity, more or less all it's participants are recognisable by the UK public which fulfills another of the criteria in WP:BIO MGSpiller 00:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep Other BB contestants on other 'ordinary' shows have pages -- Prof Jolly 01:28, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep- She's become a major part of the early part of the show. Logan1138 13:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep as PatGallacher and MGSpiller above. Sweetie Petie 14:23, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete, nn-bio, not really a 'celebrity' in the same light as
Mariah Carey or
Tom Cruise. Ideal candidate for speedy deletion. --
Sunfazer
13:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
reply
Delete - SHE IS NOT A CELEBRITY. WHY THE FUCK DO YOU ALLOW THIS SHITE?? SHE IS NOT A CELEBRITY. END OF. -- 205.234.187.222 16:28, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Strong keep/merge; either keep (which seems better to me), or merge into an article covering al l this series' Big Brother contestants. — Zazou 16:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - she will sue if she reads this. Remove for legal reasons. -- BekahHarlow 13:45, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - I know the individual, and she wants this removed. Also she isn't a celebrity, she's a Joe Public. Please remove. -- Gazza1980 14:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - Chantelle is a friend of mine, do we really need every single person in the UK on here?? Surely this should be removed. -- Dannii Harman 14:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - I know her, this article is a waste of space. She wouldn't be pleased to see it. -- ClaireJanssen 14:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - not appropriate on here, breach of personal privacy. I know her well. --
JoanneCoolChick
14:26, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
reply
(Edit conflict) Keep. → Fir e Fox 14:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - WE DO NOT WANT THIS SHIT ON WIKIPEDIA. WE CAN SUE!!! REMOVE IT NOW! -- JaneAndrews1 16:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - Obscene content, not a celebrity, remove. -- Thesunandthemoon 16:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - No need for this shit. Stop drinking soda. -- Andrew P. Lin 16:23, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Strong delete - Not a celebrity, this is a vanity page written by the
Willy on Wheels --
Kinuther
16:32, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
reply
Strong Keep Surely the reaction on this discussion page shows why she is important- by provoking reactions allround! Becoming a celebrity by being a non-celebrity. Surely that must be a first!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob77 ( talk • contribs)
DELETE WHAT A LOAD OF BLOODY SHITE. -- Gibraltarian11 16:40, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - this is not the place for such shit. It should fuck off to Uncyclopedia. -- Goulberno 16:46, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Indeed, I am getting rather concerned that people here are using multiple entries to try and settle some sort of scores!? I fail to see what the poor girl has done to merit such abuse. Is there anyway to report this to the administrators so they can take the multiple "delete" votes from the same user into account?
Delete Fight!! Yay, this is a great Wiki-brawl.... good fun to watch! Delete this odd article!! Wikipedia is Communism!! --
Covono
17:00, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
reply
Delete POV-FORK!! Wikipedia is Communism!!! Wikipedia is Communism!!! It's a POV-fork!!! -- Wickwar 17:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete What a bloody pile of shite!! -- Brambigan 17:08, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete Get rid of this page on the little slut. And User:Pigsonthewing needs to start having a wheel war with User:Firefox. -- Hoyeo 17:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC) reply