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 delete. Sandstein 08:49, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Miss National Sweetheart 2012[edit]

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

see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Sweetheart The individual years have even less notability DGG ( talk ) 04:16, 23 January 2018 (UTC) Also related: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Sweetheart, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss National Sweetheart 2013 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss National Sweetheart 2011 —MT Train^Discuss 10:53, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 00:15, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable. No significant coverage in multiple reliable sources for a stand alone article. The winner was already listed in the main article, National Sweetheart.--Richie Campbell (talk) 16:11, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, just merge all the individual years into sections of the main article and redirect. --Donald Trung (Talk) (Articles) 19:47, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all annual articles -- insufficiently notable for stand-alone pages. There's nothing to merge, as the main article already lists the winners. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:47, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the notability of the pageant is questionable enough, the yearly incarnations of it clearly are not notable enough to justify articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:18, 14 February 2018 (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.