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. MelanieN (talk) 18:22, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Tourism World 2014[edit]

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

Normally we would redirect this event article to the sponsoring business, given there are no other annual event articles, but the Miss Tourism World article has been deleted 3x already. This is commercial spam essentially. Legacypac (talk) 23:15, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 23:48, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Venezuela-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 23:48, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:50, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:10, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as per nom. Not enough notability for this event to have a standalone article, especially considering the (would-be) parent article has been deleted. Dylanfromthenorth (talk)
Delete - Does not pass WP:GNG, for a standalone article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I wouldn't call it spam, really, but not apparently notable. This may be the first time I've seen Instagram used as a source. A bit of coverage of the winner in Japan (Miss Japan was the winner) and then a bunch of blogs and self-links. Fails WP:GNG. I also can't tell if the bit of coverage that there is is coverage for Miss Tourism World, or World Miss Tourism, or Miss World Tourism International, and so on. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 15:07, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above - Blatant spam, Kill it with fire. –Davey2010^Talk 00:09, 14 January 2016 (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.