Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acid Betty

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 Draftify. Strictly speaking, it's a little bit of a stretch to declare that there's actually a consensus to draftify. However, several people (including the nom) said they would go along with that, and seems like a reasonable thing to do per WP:ATD. The concept here is that it's likely that WP:RS will show up in the future; this shouldn't get moved back to main space unless and until they do appear and get added to the article. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:41, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Acid Betty[edit]

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

WP:BLP of a drag queen and performance artist, without the reliable source coverage necessary to pass WP:GNG. The only "source" here is a Q&A-style interview on The Huffington Post — however, that type of source represents the subject talking about themself, and is thus subject to the same problems as any other public relations sourcing. It would be acceptable for some supplementary confirmation of facts after the article had already been sourced over GNG by other coverage, but it cannot count toward GNG if it is the best, or the only, source you can come up with. The article claims notability as "first and only hybrid drag queen in the world" — but if, like me, your first question was "what does 'hybrid drag queen' mean?" or "hybrid of what, exactly?", neither this article nor the interview is actually going to give you a clear answer. It seems to be a self-invented PR angle, rather than a distinction that any independent source actually conferred on Acid Betty for any identifiable reason. So there's no genuinely strong claim of notability here, and no substantive reliable source coverage — and all of that spells delete. Bearcat (talk) 20:41, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. sst ✈ 01:54, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've passed this originally, basing on The Huffington Post article, but I see the argument and agree that without other reliable sources it's delete.Arthistorian1977 (talk) 11:29, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I added some sources. Some are RS, some are iffy, but I didn't like the information being unsourced for a BLP. I agree with Bearcat that the claim of hybrid drag queen is confusing. I've noticed that Acid Betty gets a lot of mentions and seems important in NYC circles. Betty has an interview in the Huff Post and in the Village Voice. Acid Betty also might be a contestant on RuPual's Drag Race for season 8, which will be announced soon. For that reason, because the current sources are weak, I'd suggest Move to draft and if Betty is a contestant, there will be be more RS available. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be comfortable with that alternative as well — while WP:CRYSTAL certainly prevents us from treating Drag Race as a priori evidence of notability in advance of a formal announcement, it does suggest a strong possibility of having to recreate this sooner rather than later. Also, for the record, I did a Google search on "hybrid drag queen" for clarification, and turned up a Yahoo Answers thread in which it was explained that Acid Betty is a "hybrid" drag queen because she deliberately includes masculine gender elements in her drag persona as well. But (a) Yahoo Answers obviously isn't a reliable source, so I'm not suggesting we add that to the article, and (b) anybody who thinks that blurring the gender line is a claim of uniqueness for a drag queen, in and of itself, obviously doesn't know as much about drag as they think they do — that's not even rare, let alone unprecedented. Bearcat (talk) 18:55, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree as well, moving to draft may be a good solution here. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 19:51, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:55, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable, lacks indepth source coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:08, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as currently questionably solidly notable for WP:CREATIVE. SwisterTwister talk 06:06, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:06, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I am somewhat familiar with the drag scene in both New York City and Fire Island, and this person is not notable, period. Bearian (talk) 22:06, 28 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.