538:) I was in no way targeting KatoKungLee. As stated in the ANI, I see this as a page created for promotional purposes (not self-promotional, as Canterbury Tail said, but still promotional) and I nominate Mrs. Globe for deletion because it is a non-notable pageant. I was not attempting to accuse KatoKungLee of anything but merely noticed that the other 2 articles are for women who have done nothing notable other than win this non-notable pageant. We could consider a deletion approach of leaving those 2 women's articles (if there is more to those women that makes them notable) while continuing with deletion of Mrs. Globe, if that is muddying the waters too much. Unfortunately some of this discussion has spilled over into the ANI but Canterbury Tail made some great points that I suggest people look at before deciding how to further approach this. Also, to be clear - I never recommended a "speedy" deletion. I recommended an AfD. So whether the promotionalism is worthy of speedy deletion is irrelevant as that is not the issue under discussion. The issue under discussion is whether Mrs. Globe is notable, or if it exists just as marketing for a pageant and that may be due to AustralianBlackBelt having some kind of conflict of interest leading to being a promoter or somehow connected with promoting for pageants - per what Canterbury Tail said in the ANI.
693:
small, local community articles profiling a contestant for competing in a pageant makes either the national or international pageant notable. Any Jane Smith can go to her local newspaper and say she's competing in a pageant and the local newspaper will likely generously give her one article on it to support her, especially the nice reporters of Canada when they want to focus on little community stories. One-off support articles from the contestant's local town happens in almost all pageants. Doesn't make the pageant notable. Take, for example, Mrs. Continental
Worldwide. It would be laughable for anyone to consider that a notable pageant worthy of a Knowledge (XXG) page at this point (and accordingly, no such page exists), but if you look it up, yes there are local community newspapers who write a single one-off story about the Mrs. Continental Worldwide contestants, like many newspaper stories that go "so and so beauty queens #129743 of the thousands of beauty queens in the world won or is competing in so and so beauty pageant #297 of hundreds of random beauty pageants out there".
722:
personally attacked by KatoKungLee and his buddy DarkSide830 both arguing on this AfD and also threatening me with sanctions on the ANI together. I really did not ask to invite this in my life. I don't personally think
Svetlana Kruk is notable but maybe this is a conversation for another time if someone wants to nominate her article directly, separately. Right now I want the focus to be on Mrs. Globe's non-notability. I hope the personal accusations can stop and we can focus on the notability of Mrs. Globe.
611:
considered here. Do the sources in these three articles establish notability that justifies having a standalone article? Should the bios be redirected to the competition's article? I'd like to see less discussion about contributors, blocked or not blocked, and more on the whether or not GNG is evident.
716:
I would like to withdraw my nomination of
Svetlana Kruk because of new information that came to light where KatoKungLee says she won 3 pageants. Given that the 3 pageants she won are not notable (the Mrs. Universe she won isn't even the one with a wikipedia page, it seems to be a copycat pageant with
692:
This sounds like an argument for creating a Mrs. Canada Globe page, not an argument for keeping the Mrs. Globe page. Sometimes the national competition has reasons why it draws more notability than the international competition. That being said, in this case, I really do not think a couple of one-off
278:
as this person attempted to make multiple pages for Mrs. Globe alone. When you look at the sources on the article, most are broken links, and many are not reliable sources, and some aren't even about the pageant at all (per the 1st nomination). Dubious, probable COI anecdotal claims about notability
270:
Third nomination because 1st time, the creator of the page argued the case and there was not much other interest in discussion so it was closed as no consensus, and 2nd time the nomination was my long rant so it was closed as procedural keep. At no point has there been a strong argument made for
610:
I closed the second AFD and will not be closing this go-round but I will relist it with a comment. If this was an issue of promotion, then CSD G11 would have been appropriate. The nominator doesn't discuss notability much but that is usually the focus in AFD discussions that I don't see being
721:
page does not include
Svetlana Kruk), I still personally do not believe Svetlana Kruk is notable. However, clearly I misspoke when saying "self-promotion" and didn't pay enough attention to who made that article. Now I would like to withdraw the nomination of Svetlana Kruk given that I feel
297:
I am also nominating the following related pages because they are both apparently just self-promotion, most notable thing about these 2 women is that they won this non-notable pageant and previously won a non-notable national title in the lead-up to this non-notable international pageant:
516:
all. I concur that any possible promotionalism in these articles is nowhere near the level that would get them speedy-deleted. Krylova's article is certainly very bad, but its the sort of bad that is pretty easy to fix and does not merit a TNT deletion.
640:, not great because it's so dependent on a pageant contestant's voice. That is, the bulk of this source is neither secondary nor independent. From my quick review, none of the others provide SIGCOV, and many are similarly not independent.
717:
the same name that for whatever reason didn't garner the same notability, and it's very confusing to have someone else have a wikipedia page for being the winner of Mrs. Universe 2013 when the list of winners on the
55:
For the nominator. It's sources that win prizes not allegations or assessment of creator intentions. Please don't bulk nominate a BLP and a non-BLP. We tend approach them differently and it creates extra paperwork.
228:
91:
86:
81:
421:
185:
425:
429:
417:
741:
222:
413:
117:
76:
132:
535:
499:. Nowehere in this article is it clear that this is promotion, nor does an editor's conduct mean their articles are automatically reflective thereof.
409:
670:
673:
742:
https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1137#User_Fixthetyp0's_sockpuppet_allegations_over_Mrs._Globe
463:. I have no affiliation with her and I have no idea who Australianblackbelt is. I also do not see the self-promotion within these articles.
283:) are not supported. I do not see a notable pageant, all I see is a pageant inappropriately using Knowledge (XXG) as a venue for promotion.
638:
112:
105:
17:
366:
361:
320:
315:
536:
https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#User_Fixthetyp0's_sockpuppet_allegations_over_Mrs._Globe
370:
324:
561:
but merely noticed that the other 2 articles are for women who have done nothing notable other than win this non-notable pageant
274:
I am arguing that this was clearly created as promotion by
Australianblackbelt, whose account has since been blocked because of
353:
307:
158:
153:
753:
731:
702:
684:
661:
625:
586:
568:
547:
526:
508:
487:
472:
454:
438:
400:
292:
126:
122:
60:
162:
599:
243:
740:
Note: In case it's relevant (Like
Canterbury Tail's comments about possibly promotional), the ANI is now archived here:
658:
772:
210:
40:
189:
145:
522:
204:
768:
582:
504:
468:
36:
200:
749:
727:
698:
565:
I am also nominating the following related pages because they are both apparently just self-promotion
543:
518:
396:
288:
280:
275:
680:
236:
250:
357:
311:
481:
The nominator seems to be editing for the sole purpose of getting these 3 articles deleted...
101:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
767:
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
653:
578:
500:
464:
264:
745:
723:
694:
637:. From a quick review, there's only one source with SIGCOV of the subject in the article:
556:
539:
392:
284:
149:
453:- This is the most bizarre nomination I have ever seen. This user attempted to nominate
216:
676:
482:
448:
433:
260:
718:
574:
460:
349:
303:
57:
669:
there are several articles about
Canadian contestants or the Canadian qualifiers,
387:
341:
179:
650:
646:
645:
I haven't done any further research for notability, so I won't !vote, but the
141:
66:
616:
534:- If editors would please see the ANI, I would appreciate that. (
763:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
567:. We can further prove this because you said the same thing -
602:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
279:
from the creator of the page (who has since been blocked for
459:
a month ago, failed and seems to be trying again. I created
577:
not notable, because you she won four different pageants.
383:
379:
375:
337:
333:
329:
175:
171:
167:
573:. I'd also like to know on what basis are you deeming
235:
614:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
249:
52:. Only Mrs Globe has been discussed in any way.
92:Articles for deletion/Mrs. Globe (4th nomination)
87:Articles for deletion/Mrs. Globe (3rd nomination)
82:Articles for deletion/Mrs. Globe (2nd nomination)
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
775:). No further edits should be made to this page.
408:Note: This discussion has been included in the
649:article as it stands doesn't demonstrate GNG. —
271:keeping this based on Knowledge (XXG) policy.
563:". That's not what you said though. You said
8:
133:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
407:
74:
564:
560:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
267:(clear promotion or advertising).
24:
412:lists for the following topics:
118:Introduction to deletion process
77:Articles for deletion/Mrs. Globe
1:
61:03:46, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
754:14:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
732:14:11, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
703:14:11, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
685:14:39, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
662:03:29, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
626:02:46, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
587:17:32, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
548:19:02, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
527:12:25, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
509:02:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
488:18:43, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
473:00:10, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
439:07:31, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
401:02:53, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
293:02:47, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
108:(AfD)? Read these primers!
792:
765:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
72:AfDs for this article:
190:edits since nomination
106:Articles for deletion
50:Delete Mrs Globe only
608:Relisting comment:
628:
441:
123:Guide to deletion
113:How to contribute
783:
624:
613:
605:
603:
485:
451:
436:
410:deletion sorting
391:
373:
345:
327:
254:
253:
239:
183:
165:
103:
34:
791:
790:
786:
785:
784:
782:
781:
780:
779:
773:deletion review
615:
598:
596:
519:Devonian Wombat
483:
449:
434:
422:Beauty pageants
364:
348:
318:
302:
196:
156:
140:
137:
100:
97:
96:
70:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
789:
787:
778:
777:
759:
758:
757:
756:
735:
734:
710:
709:
708:
707:
706:
705:
642:
641:
631:
630:
612:
606:
592:
591:
590:
589:
529:
511:
493:
492:
491:
490:
476:
475:
442:
404:
403:
346:
257:
256:
193:
136:
135:
130:
120:
115:
98:
95:
94:
89:
84:
79:
73:
71:
69:
64:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
788:
776:
774:
770:
766:
761:
760:
755:
751:
747:
743:
739:
738:
737:
736:
733:
729:
725:
720:
719:Mrs. Universe
715:
712:
711:
704:
700:
696:
691:
688:
687:
686:
682:
678:
674:
671:
668:
665:
664:
663:
660:
657:
656:
652:
648:
644:
643:
639:
636:
633:
632:
629:
627:
623:
621:
620:
609:
604:
601:
594:
593:
588:
584:
580:
576:
575:Svetlana Kruk
572:
571:
566:
562:
558:
554:
551:
550:
549:
545:
541:
537:
533:
530:
528:
524:
520:
515:
512:
510:
506:
502:
498:
495:
494:
489:
486:
480:
479:
478:
477:
474:
470:
466:
462:
461:Svetlana Kruk
458:
457:
452:
446:
443:
440:
437:
431:
427:
423:
419:
415:
411:
406:
405:
402:
398:
394:
389:
385:
381:
377:
372:
368:
363:
359:
355:
351:
350:Svetlana Kruk
347:
343:
339:
335:
331:
326:
322:
317:
313:
309:
305:
304:Alisa Krylova
301:
300:
299:
295:
294:
290:
286:
282:
277:
272:
268:
266:
262:
252:
248:
245:
242:
238:
234:
230:
227:
224:
221:
218:
215:
212:
209:
206:
202:
199:
198:Find sources:
194:
191:
187:
181:
177:
173:
169:
164:
160:
155:
151:
147:
143:
139:
138:
134:
131:
128:
124:
121:
119:
116:
114:
111:
110:
109:
107:
102:
93:
90:
88:
85:
83:
80:
78:
75:
68:
65:
63:
62:
59:
53:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
764:
762:
713:
689:
666:
654:
634:
618:
617:
607:
597:
595:
570:here in July
569:
552:
531:
513:
496:
456:this article
455:
444:
296:
273:
269:
258:
246:
240:
232:
225:
219:
213:
207:
197:
99:
54:
49:
47:
31:
28:
579:KatoKungLee
501:DarkSide830
497:Speedy Keep
465:KatoKungLee
223:free images
746:Fixthetyp0
724:Fixthetyp0
695:Fixthetyp0
667:Weak keep,
647:Mrs. Globe
557:Fixthetyp0
540:Fixthetyp0
393:Fixthetyp0
285:Fixthetyp0
281:WP:NOTHERE
276:WP:NOTHERE
142:Mrs. Globe
67:Mrs. Globe
769:talk page
677:Oaktree b
484:Spiderone
450:Spiderone
435:Spiderone
37:talk page
771:or in a
744:Cheers,
600:Relisted
186:View log
127:glossary
39:or in a
714:Comment
690:Comment
635:Comment
553:Comment
532:Comment
445:Comment
428:, and
426:Belarus
367:protect
362:history
321:protect
316:history
229:WP refs
217:scholar
159:protect
154:history
104:New to
58:Spartaz
430:Russia
418:Events
371:delete
325:delete
265:WP:NOT
259:Fails
201:Google
163:delete
414:Women
388:views
380:watch
376:links
342:views
334:watch
330:links
244:JSTOR
205:books
180:views
172:watch
168:links
16:<
750:talk
728:talk
699:talk
681:talk
651:siro
583:talk
544:talk
523:talk
514:Keep
505:talk
469:talk
397:talk
384:logs
358:talk
354:edit
338:logs
312:talk
308:edit
289:talk
263:and
261:WP:N
237:FENS
211:news
176:logs
150:talk
146:edit
555:- @
447:- @
251:TWL
184:– (
752:)
730:)
701:)
683:)
675:.
672:,
622:iz
585:)
546:)
525:)
507:)
471:)
432:.
424:,
420:,
416:,
399:)
386:|
382:|
378:|
374:|
369:|
365:|
360:|
356:|
340:|
336:|
332:|
328:|
323:|
319:|
314:|
310:|
291:)
231:)
188:|
178:|
174:|
170:|
166:|
161:|
157:|
152:|
148:|
748:(
726:(
697:(
679:(
659:o
655:χ
619:L
581:(
559:"
542:(
521:(
503:(
467:(
395:(
390:)
352:(
344:)
306:(
287:(
255:)
247:·
241:·
233:·
226:·
220:·
214:·
208:·
203:(
195:(
192:)
182:)
144:(
129:)
125:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.