348:
unhelpful? I'd rather you only nominate truly non-notable pageant people, we do have lots of spam around here, and people who like rooting out spam are more effective if they don't nominate articles of actually notable people. My vote is 100 times more relevant than yours because I actually reviewed the article, adding readily available sources.
508:
accomplishments; that why winners of crappy pageants like "miss middle-earth continental tourism" or whatever get deleted. The sports "rules" for notability on here are ridiculous, someone plays one top level game in
American professional baseball and he gets a page. And football is even worse, with article on referees (e.g.,
587:
One-time
Olympic medalists are often complete nobodies playing sports people only care about once every four years. Yes, this is a value judgment. They get one burst (or even less than that) of coverage and that's it. When I say "people care", I mean they care reflected in the coverage which meets
566:
for instance. In the absence of such an expression of consensus (and I am willing to stand corrected if I have missed one) I have to fall back on BLP1E for cases like this, which, no matter how delightful the ladies in question are and how popular they are in their home states, I can't see as passing
492:
I'm not a big sports guy, but
Olympic Medal winners have to go through multiple competitions of skill (World Cups etc) and generally have a sports career that involve developing skills. These pageant holders show no such track record - they can basically show up and win their first event with some
381:
Apology accepted. I don't know anything about the show you are talking about, but I can't see how minor pageant wins, having a twin sister who is connected to someone famous, or dating a NASCAR driver but breaking up with him and marrying someone else does much to justify an article here. Once you
655:
I think AfD would be improved if people used less confrontational tones and refrained from attacks on other people. Saying someone has a deficient understanding is an attack. I see both sides of this debate, but think that we need to delete basically all the state winner articles, and then maybe
408:
The "let's delete something in the news" AfD is a separate phenomenon, it draws a different breed of nominator. Being a U.S. state pageant winner in the Miss
America or Miss USA pageants almost always generates enough coverage to meet WP:GNG, at least from any reasonably sized U.S. state, e.g.,
347:
I guess it is "personal" that I have observed you have a deficient understanding of notability standards, but I did not mean that to be an attack. I think editors do you a disservice when they don't point out what you are doing wrong, otherwise how can you find out that your nominations are
507:
You're making a value judgment as to whether someone has done something to deserve notability. Most pageant winners in the United States (like
Tollett) have done many pageants before winning a major U.S. State pageant. But the issue is whether the subject meets WP:GNG as a result of their
637:
I have rethought my previous positions. While in theory the title of Miss
Tennessee USA is more than just winning a competition, in the realm of actual coverage it is just that. Titles like Miss America get more than just winning coverage, but not titles below
195:
This article is a completely unsourced mess of how this women had fleeting brushes with greatness. It has sat tagged as being based on primary sources for 4 years, but it is based on NO sources. Per NOPAGE it should be deleted and a redirect sent to
421:(2012). Tollett gets mentioned in her local regional paper a ridiculous number of times even in recent years, every time she advises some other pageant person, I didn't think it worthwhile to cite those instances.--
332:
I did not delete your edit, I struck an irrelevant off topic personal attack. You've now had two chances to comment on the topic, not me, and have failed to do so, so your vote has no relevance. Merry
Christmas
164:
512:) and other incredibly minor people. In comparison, Tollett has been the subject of adulation and acclaim in Tennessee for years. It may also be for something dumb, but people care about it, so its notable.--
367:
in this alternate history and they leave you high and dry and feeling like you've wasted a lot of time, just like anyone who actually reads this entire comment by me. And for that, I am indeed sorry.--
387:
773:
I'm happy to see non-notable male models/pageant winners deleted/redirected too. Nearly all my similar nominations have now closed as delete or redirect but this one keeps getting relisted.
52:. Please, folks, everybody is welcome to participate in these discussions, but let's keep the conversation to merits of the articles. Personal attacks are never useful or welcome. --
606:. Again, I'd be more than happy to change to "keep" if there is coverage available that shows they meet GNG outside of the one title, per BLP1E #3 - is this coverage available? -
117:
530:. For Olympic one-time medalists the event " significant and role both substantial and well documented", therefore your comparative argument is unfortunatly a bit of a
217:
158:
410:
414:
567:
criterion #3. (Also, if she (and the other pageant winners in question here) have indeed been the "subject of adulation and acclaim...for years", where are the
418:
239:
546:
level, however, don't rise to the same level of notability. "People care about it so it's notable" is also a fallacy - I could link about a half-dozen
295:: This nominator is apparently nominating a bunch of U.S. state pageant winner articles, and clearly has no clue about notability, unfortunately.--
386:
that covers that, which she fails spectacularly. I'm baffled how a person can be top of the world news, charged with terrorism offences in the US
394:
coverage for making zero impact on anything or anyone other then providing some entertainment for a few hours as part of a staged production.
787:
Some of your nominations you completely blew, however. Some of the rest of the articles will get recreated, I am sure (though not by me). --
124:
90:
85:
554:
may be the most on-point. If pageants at the sub-national level are to be considered notable, there needs to be a demonstrated
94:
17:
179:
390:
and people say 'no article' but then users defend pageant winner articles where they barely get 'local person wins award'
77:
146:
674:
261:
870:
661:
643:
40:
803:
You can never predict AfD outcomes. I watch all deleted or redirected titles, so that should not be a problem.
611:
576:
461:
353:
140:
722:
per nom. Pageant winners without any other claims to notability don't really need their own separate pages.
136:
866:
851:
845:
812:
796:
782:
763:
749:
731:
712:
696:
665:
647:
617:
597:
582:
521:
502:
485:
467:
430:
403:
376:
342:
325:
304:
285:
251:
231:
209:
59:
36:
81:
835:
657:
639:
186:
834:. Not known for anything other than "also ran" in a beauty pageant. State title holders don't meet
808:
778:
770:
This is not an anti-woman issue. In fact, many argue that the whole industry is offensive to women.
759:
727:
607:
603:
572:
559:
555:
551:
498:
457:
399:
338:
278:
205:
172:
602:
It may be a value judgement, but it's a value judgement that's reflected in long-time, rock-solid
73:
65:
509:
449:
363:
358:
227:
197:
56:
382:
remove all the TMZ stuff you get down to her winning a state pageant. There is no policy except
563:
391:
247:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
865:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
840:
831:
707:
691:
383:
527:
453:
152:
740:
That has no basis in policy. Another case where I wish we had more women on wikipedia.--
351:
Your vote and nomination is so irrelevant its like a 700-page future history novel where
804:
774:
755:
723:
494:
476:
Every one-time
Olympic medal winner should be a re-direct under this theory of BLP1E.--
395:
334:
272:
201:
789:
742:
590:
547:
514:
478:
423:
369:
318:
297:
221:
53:
568:
243:
456:
is failed. However, redirect are reasonable, plasuible search terms, and cheap. -
111:
702:
686:
771:
531:
542:
paegant winners should be considered notable for winning. Pageants at the
534:. The sports notability rules are not "ridiculous". If you participate
588:
WP:GNG. Whether they should care or actually do care is irrelevant.--
357:
has 7 seasons instead of 6. You get to page 700 and question whether
754:
Seriously? A veiled misogyny accusation? Is that really appropriate?
859:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
677:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
656:
allow a few to be recreated that are on truly notable people.
571:
outside of the burst of coverage for the one pageant win?) -
264:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
388:
Knowledge:Articles_for_deletion/Enrique_Marquez_(accomplice)
349:
314:
107:
103:
99:
171:
701:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
270:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
493:couching, as evidenced by some of the interviews.
316:, please, or I will have you deported to Pluto.--
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
873:). No further edits should be made to this page.
411:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Courtney Barnas
452:, as it seems to me that this is a case where
415:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Julianna White
218:list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions
685:Comment on content, not contributor, please.
419:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Regan Hartley
185:
8:
238:Note: This debate has been included in the
216:Note: This debate has been included in the
240:list of People-related deletion discussions
237:
215:
200:where her name should properly be listed.
7:
558:(even if the description of it is "
550:that are close variations on that;
538:, you are notable. With pageants,
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
813:21:57, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
797:21:52, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
783:19:57, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
764:16:43, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
750:15:40, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
732:05:26, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
713:09:29, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
697:09:29, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
666:08:34, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
648:08:30, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
618:17:30, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
598:12:21, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
583:06:55, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
522:20:34, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
503:19:38, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
486:18:08, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
468:00:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
431:21:08, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
404:18:00, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
377:17:35, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
343:17:13, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
326:14:12, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
305:06:04, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
286:00:49, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
526:Please note criterion #3 of
252:23:25, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
232:10:35, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
210:10:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
852:14:35, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
60:15:30, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
890:
450:Miss Tennessee USA#Winners
536:at the professional level
862:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
562:") of the same sort as
361:would still appear in
313:Do not delete my edits
683:Relisting comment:
548:arguments to avoid
510:Cristina Dorcioman
364:Marriage Boot Camp
359:Michael Sorrentino
198:Miss Tennessee USA
795:
748:
715:
658:John Pack Lambert
640:John Pack Lambert
596:
520:
484:
429:
375:
324:
303:
288:
254:
234:
881:
864:
850:
848:
843:
794:
747:
700:
680:
678:
614:
595:
579:
569:reliable sources
519:
483:
464:
428:
374:
323:
302:
284:
281:
275:
269:
267:
265:
224:
190:
189:
175:
127:
115:
97:
34:
889:
888:
884:
883:
882:
880:
879:
878:
877:
871:deletion review
860:
846:
841:
839:
838:on that alone.
716:
711:
695:
673:
671:
616:
612:
581:
577:
466:
462:
289:
279:
273:
271:
260:
258:
222:
132:
123:
88:
72:
69:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
887:
885:
876:
875:
855:
854:
824:
823:
822:
821:
820:
819:
818:
817:
816:
815:
768:
767:
766:
735:
734:
705:
699:
689:
681:
670:
669:
668:
650:
631:
630:
629:
628:
627:
626:
625:
624:
623:
622:
621:
620:
610:
608:The Bushranger
575:
573:The Bushranger
489:
488:
471:
470:
460:
458:The Bushranger
442:
441:
440:
439:
438:
437:
436:
435:
434:
433:
329:
328:
308:
307:
268:
257:
256:
255:
235:
193:
192:
129:
68:
63:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
886:
874:
872:
868:
863:
857:
856:
853:
849:
844:
837:
836:WP:PAGEDECIDE
833:
829:
826:
825:
814:
810:
806:
802:
801:
800:
799:
798:
792:
791:
786:
785:
784:
780:
776:
772:
769:
765:
761:
757:
753:
752:
751:
745:
744:
739:
738:
737:
736:
733:
729:
725:
721:
718:
717:
714:
709:
704:
698:
693:
688:
684:
679:
676:
667:
663:
659:
654:
651:
649:
645:
641:
636:
633:
632:
619:
615:
613:One ping only
609:
605:
601:
600:
599:
593:
592:
586:
585:
584:
580:
578:One ping only
574:
570:
565:
561:
560:only an essay
557:
553:
549:
545:
541:
537:
533:
529:
525:
524:
523:
517:
516:
511:
506:
505:
504:
500:
496:
491:
490:
487:
481:
480:
475:
474:
473:
472:
469:
465:
463:One ping only
459:
455:
451:
447:
444:
443:
432:
426:
425:
420:
416:
412:
407:
406:
405:
401:
397:
393:
389:
385:
380:
379:
378:
372:
371:
366:
365:
360:
356:
355:
350:
346:
345:
344:
340:
336:
331:
330:
327:
321:
320:
315:
312:
311:
310:
309:
306:
300:
299:
294:
291:
290:
287:
282:
276:
266:
263:
253:
249:
245:
241:
236:
233:
229:
225:
219:
214:
213:
212:
211:
207:
203:
199:
188:
184:
181:
178:
174:
170:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
138:
135:
134:Find sources:
130:
126:
122:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
861:
858:
830:for failing
827:
788:
741:
719:
682:
672:
652:
634:
604:WP:CONSENSUS
589:
556:WP:CONSENSUS
552:WP:LOCALFAME
543:
539:
535:
513:
477:
445:
422:
368:
362:
354:Jersey Shore
352:
317:
296:
292:
259:
194:
182:
176:
168:
161:
155:
149:
143:
133:
120:
74:Lisa Tollett
66:Lisa Tollett
49:
47:
31:
28:
159:free images
564:WP:SOLDIER
392:WP:ROUTINE
867:talk page
832:WP:ANYBIO
805:Legacypac
775:Legacypac
756:Lithorien
724:Lithorien
532:straw man
495:Legacypac
396:Legacypac
384:WP:NMODEL
335:Legacypac
274:Kharkiv07
244:• Gene93k
202:Legacypac
37:talk page
869:or in a
790:Milowent
743:Milowent
675:Relisted
591:Milowent
540:national
528:WP:BLP1E
515:Milowent
479:Milowent
454:WP:BLP1E
446:Redirect
424:Milowent
417:(2010);
413:(2008);
370:Milowent
319:Milowent
298:Milowent
262:Relisted
118:View log
54:RoySmith
39:or in a
847:Riband►
653:Comment
165:WP refs
153:scholar
91:protect
86:history
828:Delete
720:Delete
703:clpo13
687:clpo13
635:Delete
137:Google
95:delete
57:(talk)
50:delete
638:that.
544:state
180:JSTOR
141:books
125:Stats
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
842:Blue
809:talk
779:talk
760:talk
728:talk
708:talk
692:talk
662:talk
644:talk
499:talk
400:talk
339:talk
293:Keep
248:talk
228:talk
206:talk
173:FENS
147:news
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
448:to
223:GSS
187:TWL
116:– (
811:)
793:•
781:)
762:)
746:•
730:)
664:)
646:)
594:•
518:•
501:)
482:•
427:•
402:)
373:•
341:)
322:•
301:•
250:)
242:.
230:)
220:.
208:)
167:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
807:(
777:(
758:(
726:(
710:)
706:(
694:)
690:(
660:(
642:(
497:(
398:(
337:(
283:)
280:T
277:(
246:(
226:(
204:(
191:)
183:·
177:·
169:·
162:·
156:·
150:·
144:·
139:(
131:(
128:)
121:·
114:)
76:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.