Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Andrew Show

The Andrew Show

The Andrew Show (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I came across this article while reviewing WP:DYK nominations and I do not understand how it can possibly meet the requirements we have for coverage of WP:BLPMINORs. While it is not a biography, it includes extensive biographical material about someone who was a young child at the time. While the subject is almost certainly not a minor now, he was at the time this program was filmed and thus did not have the ability to make independent decisions about whether to participate in this atrocious public access TV program. (I have no idea what kind of adult he turned into, but having his mother's and grandfather's racism platformed in his name, when he was not of age to consent to what he was doing, in the world's most important website just will not do.)

Per WP:BLPMINOR, coverage of minors must be done so that it is even less contentious than would be acceptable for a competent adult or not contentious at all. Do so not just by adding sources but by toning down the content in a way that remains consistent with sourcing. This article relies on mostly bloggy, low-quality sources for an article that highlights extremely negative information on someone who was a minor at the time and, hopefully, grew out of those unconscionable views as he grew into adulthood. A child appearing on public-access TV is WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE and as a result Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care.

I am also unconvinced that this show meets WP:GNG due to coverage in independent, reliable, secondary sources. Of the seven sources in the article, two (Dangerous Minds, which per its footer is part of WP:FAROUT, and WP:HUFFPOCON, see contributor bio) are generally unreliable per WP:RSN. Three of them (WP:JEZEBEL, WP:VICE, an unbylined WP:DAILYDOT piece) are flagged as "yellow" due to no consensus about their reliability, with advice that Jezebel (used for the hook fact) generally not be used for contentious claims, especially ones about living persons. The Rooster source is a two-paragraph summary of the video, and the source does not appear reliable (it looks like a WP:CHURNALISM outfit). PopMatters may be reliable but the article is unbylined. Sources found in my WP:BEFORE search are similarly in entertainment blogs, self-published sources, user-generated sources and other non-qualifying outlets. Given that negative biographical coverage of a minor should require high-quality sourcing, I do not consider the available sources sufficient to pass the necessary bar, and the weak sourcing combined with BLPMINOR and NOTPUBLICFIGURE concerns combine to result in a WP:NOPAGE judgment that this page should be deleted. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:17, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Discrimination, and United States of America. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:17, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. I also think that the PopMatters article shouldn't count as WP:SIGCOV, so even if it might be reliable it doesn't contribute to notability. —Em-as-in-emily (talk) 04:33, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
• Keep (as page creator). I disagree with your assessment of the page. I don't think BLPMINOR is violated at all, the page only contains verifiable and truthful information presented in a neutral tone. I don't think any of the claims made about Andrew are contentious. The PopMatters, Vice, DailyDot, and Jezebel sources are enough for it to pass GNG. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 13:18, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
• Keep. Some of the sources used in the article maybe not be exactly stellar, but there is enough coverage to justify an article, also from intentional media e.g. from Sweden 1 2. I failed to see how this is a BLP issue; the fact that Pendergraft hosted this show is widely known and not contentious. Cortador (talk) 19:37, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

The fact is that his mother and grandfather put him in front of a camera. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:46, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

A child being made to act or appear in television by their parents is not unusual, technically no child actors have the legal right to consent to being on camera (and thus need their parents to make that decision). The fact that a kid hosted the show is not contentious or controverted enough to be a BLP issue. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 00:51, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Child actors aren't generally put on screen by their parents to say reprehensible things. Andrew didn't just host a show; his parent put him in a position to host a racist show to promote the KKK, and he was not legally able to consent to that choice. Unless there's some evidence that he still holds these views and is some kind of public figure (evidence I've not seen), we should be cautious per WP:BLP and WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE in using Wikipedia to draw attention to the horrible things a person did before the age of consent. Dclemens1971 (talk) 08:03, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 04:24, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete: If this isn't a BLP violation, I don't know what is. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:27, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
• Comment Interesting case. I've invoked the WP:MINORS essay myself on occasion, but isn't it a stretch to argue from it when the person isn't a minor now? WP:BLP obviously applies. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:59, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

  It's the intersection of NOTPUBLICFIGURE and MINORS that to my mind creates the BLP problems -- this is a person whose appears to have done just this one thing that attracted press attention and has since been low-profile. If the only thing one has done that attracted press attention was done as a minor, before the age of consent, and the thing done is a reprehensible thing, should the low-profile adult be forever tarred with actions taken before he had the ability to consent? Where there are grey areas, I think BLP indicates we should come down against inclusion in Wikipedia. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:43, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete It's a judgement call, and the content seems reasonable and plausible, but with BLP-stuff this icky, stronger (per WP:RSP) sources should be present. I asked Google's AI "What is Andrew Pendergraft of the Andrew Show doing now?" and it didn't point to anything useful, except a warning not to confuse him with other people with the same name. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:28, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
• Keep. Alternately, merge to Thom Robb.

You may be using a different definition of "contentious" than what I understand. Contentious IMO means disputed, not highlights extremely negative information. As far as I know none of the facts in this article are disputed. The tone is also value-neutral per WP:CONTENTIOUS. The article does not draw any conclusions or aspersions about Andrew as a human being or his beliefs.

I'm new to AfD so I don't know how BLP and GNG normally intersect, but this seems to meet WP:NTVLOCAL per Cortador. If this is a BLP issue, I would argue that the discussion should not be based on the notability of the child, but that of the family. Thom Robb established himself as a public figure, and this TV show is notable for being a publicity stunt undertaken on that basis. (Hence my alternate support for a merge to his article. It currently has a passing mention of this show.)

Public actions taken by families using their children regularly receive coverage, e.g. Balloon boy hoax, Heaven Is for Real, Toddlers & Tiaras, family influencers. After these types of productions receive sustained coverage, they become eligible for articles. Involvement of a child as a private individual or a victim isn't grounds to censor coverage of the actions of the family, it's grounds to contextualize the event in terms of the adults responsible.

Would WP:BLPMINOR really apply to the entire article? I don't see where. The intro and "Background" discuss the family's motivation for creating this TV show as propaganda. The "Reception" section discusses responses to the TV show, even acknowledging the middle school age as disturbing. The only area where I can see it applying is the "Content" section, which summarizes and quotes statements attributed to Andrew. The article doesn't include personal details about him besides his name and state (edit: I suppose there is also his homeschooling). Even if Andrew is WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE, by nature of the show being named after him, he must be identified by name.

The interest in coverage, from a news or encyclopedic perspective, isn't that a child made a TV show. It's that adults used a child to make a TV show as an act of propaganda and distributed it in a public channel, and that was a novel cause for public concern in the early 2010s. Blepbob (talk) 13:00, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

(moving my reply under the relisting notice) Strangely, following your logic leads me in the opposite direction. He was made to do a terrible thing, but the nature of its terribleness is what drew public reaction and media coverage in the first place. People reacted like you did, with horror. The terrible nature of the act is why the article received enough coverage to be notable. Blepbob (talk) 13:16, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete It's sad to see a child being used to front racism like this but, ultimately, we are talking about a public access television show featuring a child. This doesn't need to be on an encyclopedia. Simonm223 (talk) 15:10, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
• Comment It looks to me like the show probably passes WP:GNG, so the case for deleting isn't particularly compelling. We might consider keeping the article, but removing the "host"'s full name from the article. Anyone who really wants to find Andrew's last name can certainly do so, but I don't see much value in having that full name stated in the article, such that this article is the first link if you Google the full name. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 19:31, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

  Note that Andrew Pendergraft is a redirect, that won't change by editing the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:59, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

  But we can have the redirect removed. SenshiSun (talk) 03:46, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
  1. Book sources:
     1. Surmiak-Domańska, Katarzyna [pl] (2015), Ku Klux Klan: Tu Mieszka Miłość [Ku Klux Klan: Love Lives Here] (in Polish). Wołowiec: Wydawnictwo Czarne [pl]. ISBN 978-83-8049-154-0. Retrieved 2026-05-13 – via Internet Archive.

        The book notes: "„Czesé, jestem Andrew. A ten program jest dla wszystkich bialych dzieciaków! - krzyczy Andrew, któremu pewnie powiedziano, zeby mówit smialo. - Wiecie, ze nasza bozonarodzeniowa konferencja bardzo sie udala? Byly koledy, zabawy, pieklismy ciasteczka, robilismy bialy lukier na tort. Moja mama opowiadata nam, jak sie robi lukier na gwiazdkowy tort. Ze jezeli do bialego lukru dostanie sie choé kropla innego koloru, to ten lukier juz nigdy nie bedzie bialy. I tak samo jest z ludémi. No, to by bylo na tyle. Do zobaczenia za tydzien. Bye, bye". - Andrew macha tapka pieska. Odcinki programu U lhe Andrew v Show trwaja od kilku do kilkunastu minut. „Ogladacie na Cartoon Network taki serial Tajemniczy Sobotowie? Tam jest chlopiec, Zak, który ma czarnego tate i biala mame. A moze widzieliscie nowy film z serii G.I. Joe? Jest tam taka scena, gdy biata kobieta i czarny mezczyzna sie caluja. To bardzo zte" - poucza chlopiec i glaszcze bokserke. Czasami zamiast pieska jest pacynka - matpka ubrana w niebieska koszule i zólty krawat i wtedy Andrew daje sie poznaé jako brzuchomówca: „Znacie Justina Biebera?" „No jaaaasne! On jest gwiazda pop!" - odpowiada grubym glosem pacynka. ... Andrew Pendergraft nalezy do Ku Klux Klanu od kolyski."

        From Google Translate: ""Hi, I'm Andrew. And this show is for all the white kids out there!" shouts Andrew—who was likely told to speak up. "Did you know that our Christmas gathering was a huge success? We sang carols, played games, baked cookies, and made white frosting for the cake. My mom told us a story about making frosting for a Christmas cake: she said that if even a single drop of another color gets into the white frosting, it will never be truly white again. And it’s the same with people. Well, that’s all for now. See you next week. Bye-bye!" — Andrew waves the little dog's paw. Episodes of *The Andrew Show* range in length from a few minutes to just over ten. "Do you guys watch that show on Cartoon Network called *The Secret Saturdays*? There’s a boy on it—Zak—who has a Black dad and a white mom. Or maybe you’ve seen the new *G.I. Joe* movie? There’s a scene in it where a white woman and a Black man kiss. That is very wrong," the boy admonishes, stroking his Boxer dog. Sometimes, instead of the dog, there is a hand puppet—a monkey dressed in a blue shirt and a yellow tie— and that is when Andrew reveals his skills as a ventriloquist: "Do you know Justin Bieber?" "Well, *duuuh*! He’s a pop star!" the puppet replies in a deep, gravelly voice. ... Andrew Pendergraft has belonged to the Ku Klux Klan since the cradle."

     2. Less significant coverage:
        1. Newton, Michael (2014). White Robes and Burning Crosses: A History of the Ku Klux Klan from 1866. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company. p. 251. ISBN 978-0-7864-7774-6. Retrieved 2026-05-13 – via Google Books.

           The book notes: "Daughter Rachel hosts "The White Women's Perspective," while blond grandson Andrew Pendergraft stars in "The Andrew Show." As mom Rachel explains, Andrew "is proud to be a white Christian boy in America, but he knows that because of his minority status, the odds might be stacked against his people.""

        2. Kamali, Sara (2021). Homegrown Hate: Why White Nationalists and Militant Islamists Are Waging War Against the United States. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. p. 233. ISBN 978-0-520-97611-5. Retrieved 2026-05-13 – via Google Books.

           The book notes: "The Andrew Show, a popular YouTube series hosted by preteen Andrew Pendergraft, the grandson of Thomas Robb, the modern-day Ku Klux Klan’s national director, is one example. Pendergraft’s online videos use pop culture references to advise against race-mixing and promote White nationalist beliefs."

  2. Häggström, Andreas (2013-07-01). "13-årig pojke leder barnprogram som varnar för "rasblandning"" [13-year-old boy hosts children's program warning about "race mixing"]. Nyheter24 [sv] (in Swedish). Archived from the original on 2023-05-21. Retrieved 2026-05-13.

     The article notes: "Andrew Pendergraft, 13, har haft ett eget teveprogram inom KKK– och viktmaktrörelsen sedan han var 10 år gammal. I "The Andrew Show" vänder han sig till andra vita, amerikanska barn för att varna dem för "rasblandning". "Hej! Mitt namn är Andrew – och det här programmet är för alla vita barn där ute!" Så inleder Andrew Pendergraft, den numera 13-årige programledaren för "The Andrew Show". Barnprogrammet produceras av vitmaktrörelsen Knights of the Ku Klux Klan i USA och Andrew har varit programledare sedan han var tio år gammal. ... Rent estetiskt skulle "The Andrew Show" kunna härstamma från 1980-talet men faktum är att nya avsnitt producerades så sent som april i år. ... Andrew sägs vända sig till andra amerikanska, vita barn, med målet att berätta om saker "som han bryr sig om". Ämnena sträcker sig från allt om hästar och kakbak, till film– och musikstjärnor – och "rasblandning". Gemensamt för alla samtalsämnen är att de alltid slutar i det sistnämnda. Andrew läser alltid från manuskort och tittar sällan in i kameran."

     From Google Translate: "Andrew Pendergraft, 13, has had his own TV show within the KKK and white power movement since he was 10 years old. In "The Andrew Show", he addresses other white, American children to warn them about "race mixing". "Hi! My name is Andrew - and this show is for all the white kids out there!" This is how Andrew Pendergraft, the now 13-year-old host of "The Andrew Show", begins. The children's show is produced by the white power movement Knights of the Ku Klux Klan in the US and Andrew has been a host since he was ten years old. ... Aesthetically, "The Andrew Show" could date back to the 1980s, but in fact, new episodes were produced as recently as April of this year. ... Andrew is said to turn to other American, white children, with the goal of telling them about things "that he cares about". The topics range from everything from horses and baking cookies to movie and music stars and "mixed race". What all the topics of conversation have in common is that they always end in the latter. Andrew always reads from a script card and rarely looks into the camera."

  3. Uotinen, Jenni (2016-08-27). "Andrew, 12, kuuluu Ku Klux Klanin mahtisukuun: "Pelastakaa valkoinen rotu"" [Andrew, 12, is part of the Ku Klux Klan: "Save the White Race"]. Iltalehti (in Finnish). Archived from the original on 2026-05-13. Retrieved 2026-05-13.

     The article notes: "Vasta 12-vuotias Andrew Pendergraft edustaa pahamaineisen Ku Klux Klanin uutta sukupolvea. Hänet esitellään illan 6D-dokumentissa Ku Klux Klan, joka on valmistunut vuonna 2013. ... Andrew on tehnyt samaa jo aiemmin YouTubessa, jossa hänen The Andrew Show’nsa on pyörinyt. Sen saatesanoissa kerrotaan, että kyseessä on valkoihoisille suunnattu show. Äitinsä kotikouluttama ja valmentama Andrew tuomitsee tubekanavallaan esimerkiksi nimeltä mainiten afroamerikkalaisen ja valkoihoisen parin kihlautumisen. ... Dokumentin tekijät pääsevät kuvaamaan, kuinka Rachel Pendergraft johdattelee poikaansa seuraavan jakson tekemisessä. Hän muistuttaa lastenohjelmasta, jossa on tapahtunut äidin mielestä jotain epäilyttävää. ... Viimeksi kolmisen vuotta sitten päivitetty kanava on saanut maailmanlaajuista huomiota. Esille on nostettu muun muassa jakso, jossa Andrew on pantu paheksumaan Disney-elokuvan Tiana-prinsessaa. Ongelmana on, että animaation prinssi on valkoihoinen."

     From Google Translate: "Andrew Pendergraft, who is only 12 years old, represents the new generation of the infamous Ku Klux Klan. He is introduced in tonight's 6D documentary Ku Klux Klan, which was completed in 2013. ... Andrew has done the same thing before on YouTube, where his The Andrew Show has been running. Its subtitles state that it is a show aimed at white people. Homeschooled and coached by his mother, Andrew condemns the engagement of an African-American and a white couple on his YouTube channel, mentioning them by name, for example. ... The documentary's creators get to film how Rachel Pendergraft guides her son in making the next episode. She recalls a children's program where something suspicious happened in the mother's opinion. ... The channel, which was last updated about three years ago, has received global attention. Among other things, an episode has been highlighted in which Andrew is made to dislike the Disney film Princess Tiana. The problem is that the prince in the animation is white."

  4. Richards, Mark (2013-07-06). "The KKK Kids Show Was a Really Unfortunate Thing For Adults To Teach Children". WLZW. Archived from the original on 2026-05-13. Retrieved 2026-05-13.

     The article notes: "Can you believe there was once a KKK kids show? The creepy show was hosted by Andrew Pendergraft. He is the grandson of modern-day Ku Klux Klan national director Thomas Robb. When he was just a ten year old boy in 2009, they filmed several short episodes of his own amateur talk show. It was called 'The Andrew Show', which sounds nice, then the racist content appears. Sadly Andrew talks about Klan ideology while calling the series a “show for white kids.”

  5. Treborg, Ingrid Marie (2013-06-30). "Ku Klux Klan lanserer barne-TV" [Ku Klux Klan launches children's TV] (in Norwegian). TV 2 Direkte. Archived from the original on 2026-05-13. Retrieved 2026-05-13.

     The article notes: "Ku Klux Klan har i tre är hatt et online TV-program for barn, og nà skal de lage sin egen barne-TV-kanal pà nettet. Navnet pà programmet er «The Andrew Show - a Show for White Kids!», og er à finne pà den heyreekstreme organisasjonens nettside. Programlederen er Arkansas-gutten Andrew Pendergraft (13), som er barnebarnet til klanens leder Thomas Robb."

     From Google Translate: "The Ku Klux Klan has had an online TV program for children for three years, and now they are going to create their own children's TV channel on the Internet. The name of the program is "The Andrew Show - a Show for White Kids!", and can be found on the far-right organization's website. The program is hosted by Arkansas boy Andrew Pendergraft (13), who is the grandson of the clan's leader Thomas Robb."

  6. Winnicka, Ewa (2015-09-13). "Ku-Klux-Klan. Ofiary mówią w mediach często i chętnie, oprawcy zwykle milczą" [The Ku Klux Klan. Victims speak out frequently and willingly in the media; their tormentors usually remain silent.]. Gazeta Wyborcza (in Polish). Archived from the original on 2026-05-13. Retrieved 2026-05-13.

     The article notes: "Trafiłam na "The Andrew Show". Andrew to ten dziewięciolatek, który prowadzi program telewizyjny małych rasistów? Niestety, mogłam obejrzeć tylko te najbardziej lightowe odcinki, bo większość jest zablokowana w internecie ze względu na niecenzuralne treści."

     From Google Translate: "I stumbled upon "The Andrew Show." Is Andrew that nine-year-old who hosts a TV show for little racists? Unfortunately, I was only able to watch the mildest episodes, as most of them are blocked online due to uncensored content."

  7. Balloussier, Anna Virginia (2016-10-26). "Ku Klux Klan transfere ódio de negros para migrantes e endossa Trump" [Ku Klux Klan Shifts Hatred from Black People to Migrants and Endorses Trump] (in Portuguese). Universo Online. Retrieved 2026-05-13.

     The article notes: "O filho de Pendergraft, quando criança, transmitia os ideais da família em "The Andrew Show", no YouTube. Ali falou sobre a primeira heroína negra da Disney, de "A Princesa e o Sapo". "O príncipe é branco, mas a mistura de raças é errada", diz o garoto com cabelo cor gema de ovo. Sua mãe diz desejar "o melhor para [não brancos] em seus próprios países". A morte de agentes no Texas e na Louisiana, por jovens enfurecidos com a violência policial contra afroamericanos, escapa à compreensão de Pendergraft. "Quando a lei e a ordem brancas eram respeitadas, as comunidades negras eram mais seguras.""

     From Google Translate: "As a child, Pendergraft’s son espoused the family’s ideals on "The Andrew Show" on YouTube. There, he spoke about Disney’s first Black heroine, from *The Princess and the Frog*. "The prince is white, but race-mixing is wrong," says the boy with egg-yolk-colored hair. His mother says she wishes "the best for [non-whites] in their own countries." The killing of officers in Texas and Louisiana—perpetrated by youths enraged by police violence against African Americans—is beyond Pendergraft’s comprehension. "When white law and order were respected, Black communities were safer.""

  8. "7 cosas que no sabías sobre el Ku Klux Klan" [7 Things You Didn't Know About the Ku Klux Klan] (in Spanish). Univision. 2014-11-30. Archived from the original on 2026-05-13. Retrieved 2026-05-13.

     The article notes: "The Andrew Show es una serie de videos emitida a partir de 2009 en la que dos niños rubios de unos 9 y 10 años aproximadamente compartían «sus» opiniones sobre temas vinculados a la raza y la religión para niños de su edad. Lo cierto es que en los videos se puede notar claramente cómo Andrew Pendergraft en realidad leía de alguna especie de cartel o telepronter detrás de cámara."

     From Google Translate: "The Andrew Show is a video series that began airing in 2009, in which two blond children—approximately 9 and 10 years old—shared "their" opinions on topics related to race and religion, aimed at children their own age. The truth is that, in the videos, one can clearly see how Andrew Pendergraft was actually reading from some sort of cue card or teleprompter located off-camera."

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow The Andrew Show to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 10:47, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

• The Andrew Show received significant coverage in Surmiak-Domańska, Katarzyna [pl]'s 2015 book. It received less significant coverage in a 2014 book and a 2021 book. The Andrew Show received significant coverage in a Swedish article, a Finnish article, and a Norwegian article as well as additional coverage in American, Brazilian, and Polish sources. There is enough sustained coverage in a diversity of international sources for the subject to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline.

  Regarding the position that the Wikipedia article inflicts reputational harm, Andrew Pendergraft's hosting of the show has already received widespread sustained international coverage over several years. To comply with WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE's Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care, the Wikipedia article can add context by underscoring that he did the show as a young child at the direction of the adults in his life. From the sources:

  1. Häggström 2013: "Andrew always reads from a script card and rarely looks into the camera."
  2. Uotinen 2016: "The documentary's creators get to film how Rachel Pendergraft guides her son in making the next episode."
  3. Univision 2014: "The truth is that, in the videos, one can clearly see how Andrew Pendergraft was actually reading from some sort of cue card or teleprompter located off-camera."
  Cunard (talk) 10:47, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

• Keep with conditions: removing all unnecessary biographical information and removing the images and clips. There is no way to make this show not be contentious. It is designed to be contentious from the start. But we can write this in a way that doesn't promote beliefs from a known hate group. I like @Cunard 's suggestion of emphasizing these may not be his words. (Though the non English sources will need to be checked for accuracy and reliability before they go to main.) I assume this is already marked contentious, but if not, we may want to mark it as such.SenshiSun (talk) 04:00, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

  I disagree with you saying there's no way to not make it contentious. In the case of claims on Wikipedia, contentious means controverted or contested. None of the claims made are actually in dispute. The facts may be offensive or upsetting, but they aren't contentious. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 04:07, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

  Template:Contentious topics/list implies it's already marked contentious because of it being close to a BLP. That wasn't the way I had meant it, but I am fine with the outcome. SenshiSun (talk) 20:15, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. The subject is clearly notable per the references Cunard located. I also found a mention in doi.org/10.4135/9781452276274.n508, but was unable to access the source to see how significant the coverage is. The nomination argues these are "low-quality" sources, pointing to RSP listings, but there is no specific argument as to how they are specifically unreliable in this context (per WP:RSCONTEXT). The nomination doesn't explain why the lack of bylining on the Pop Matters article makes it unreliable. Katzrockso (talk) 01:12, 15 May 2026 (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.