- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.
The result was no consensus. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 00:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Farah Eslaquit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
fails WP:GNG The Banner talk 21:40, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - 7th runner-up of what? NN. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 21:45, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom & |Why should I have a User Name?- No evidence of notability, Only stuff I've found is Facebook related which isn't good enough. –Davey2010 • (talk) 21:48, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Assuming the credentials can be verified, Keep based on past outcomes and growing consensus that Miss Universe contestants are almost always notable. Bearian (talk) 17:28, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as per Bearian. Source here and here and here. This source documents her being in Miss Universe pageant. Seems like articles are being put up for deletion, without going through the WP:BEFORE process.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 00:52, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - This nominator is making a bad faith, wholesale attempt to remove Miss Universe contestants. Each of them has achieved two events, their National win and their participation in the heavily media covered Miss Universe pageant. All of these Noms should be rejected now and the nominator The Banner should be banned from making such nominations in the future. After I'm through locating the damage this user is trying to do, I'll try to come back to add more sources, sources I know exist because they exist for all contestants of this worldwide televised, publicized event. Trackinfo (talk) 10:21, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: When I looked to add sources to this article, it is amazing how much coverage there is of the national event. I can't specifically source the two opinions requiring citation, maybe those don't belong in the article, but half the statement seems accurate, there is a part of the Nicaraguan people who do follow this closely. Trackinfo (talk) 18:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you please stop making personal attacks? The Banner talk 15:20, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
An AfD is not a substitute for an WP:RFC/U. Let's drop the bad-faith accusations quickly please, until solid evidence in a more appropriate forum is presented. Drmies (talk) 18:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I fail to see how pointing out a pattern of unproductive time-wasting AfDs including this one constitutes any kind of "bad-faith accusation".--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
|
- Comment. I see no evidence above of personal attacks. Wikipedia requires that steps be taken before nominating articles for deletion, such as taking "reasonable steps to search for reliable sources". It appears as if The Banner has been rapid-fire AfDing numerous articles without taking such steps (see chart). Perhaps it is done to advance a personal anti-beauty contestant agenda? As of Sept. 14, 2014, there have been numerous beauty contestant articles AfD-ed; as best I can tell, not one has resulted in a deletion decision, although many decisions are still pending. It appears to myself, Trackinfo as was noted here and Milowent as was noted here that these are bad-faith nominations, done without the requisite preparatory steps. These mindless and unnecessary nominations result in time-wasting fuss. My sense is The Banner should either be banned from editing or blocked from AfDing any articles.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 14:16, 14 September 2014 (UTC)--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:16, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a nice example from cherry picking as I have AfD'ed and prodded more beauty pageant contestants. But these ladies were removed. As this is inconvenient, mr. Tomwsulcer failed to add them to his list. It is also a nice example of overreacting by mr. Tomwsulcer demanding draconian measures to satisfy his WP:IDONTLIKEIT. The Banner talk 17:08, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hey Banner. If you have other AfDs yet undiscovered, one's you think are really worthy of deletion, by all means let us know. This wasn't cherry picking. These were just the ones I could find. Trackinfo (talk) 17:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The method I used when constructing the list, on right, was to choose every deletion nomination that Banner made, starting with today (Sept 14) and working backward until Sept 1 when Marcelina Vahekeni was nominated for deletion; I only chose beauty contestant deletion discussions; I did not skip over any; I did not cherrypick. In no instances, did I find a nomination with a majority of 'delete' votes or a vote to Delete. If there are AfD nominations for beauty contestants that you made and which resulted in a 'Delete' decision, please let us know. That's 19 deletion nominations over a two-week period with (so far) not one delete decision.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 17:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:15, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
|
Delete.Switch to neutral I am unpersuaded by arguments from precedent (which is basically Bearian's only argument), given that it's entirely possible that the precedent is not, in fact, in line with actual policy. And that is, in my view, the case here: this contestant (and many others) easily faily WP:GNG and thus the articles should be deleted. LHMask me a question 17:59, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- While I remain convinced that such pageants should be treated like reality programs are, with contestants being redirected to the main article, it's clear that there are multiple sources for the contestants. I'm still unconvinced that simply because there are sources, that an article is merited, particularly given WP:ONEEVENT, but am switching my recommendation to "neutral", based on the fact that I was mistaken about the lack of sources. I do, of course, reserve the right to renominate this article (and others) at a future date, using more apt reasoning than the current nomination presents. My apologies for not looking deeper into the sourcing before making my comments above. LHMask me a question 15:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- What about the WP:GNG? Sources here and here, her photo here and here, coverage here, article that her uncle died by killer bees, blurb here, photo here. Then there are sources in Spanish language news such as here and here and here and here. Clearly these sources add to notability. What Bearian and others are saying that any Miss Universe contestant will have so much media exposure, even from a relatively small country in terms of population such as Nicaragua, that these mass deletions of all Miss Universe contestants seems unwarranted.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:33, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: I added an article about her from the Guatamalan paper of record a few days ago, she's clearly notable. There's much about there to show she meets WP:GNG.--Milowent • hasspoken 20:47, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.