Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bathing Beauties

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bathing Beauties

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:N; article has no sources and attempting to search for the toys yields nothing but eBay listings, YouTube commercial uploads, and a couple of other websites that are more so other listings. The article was previously PRODed back in 2007 but was removed by the article creator "created the page while editing other Tonka articles so that people can improve it," yet since then no substantial improvement has been made. reppop^talk 22:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Toys-related deletion discussions. reppop^talk 22:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't find anything for these toys, perhaps in paper sources? There are no sources online. Oaktree b (talk) 00:16, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Article fails WP:GNG. I couldn't find anything online and to Oaktree b's point about paper sources, Newspapers.com doesn't have anything. Apparently "Bathing beauties" was a type of swimsuit beauty contest, the name of a dog grooming business, and an unrelated Shirley Temple doll. There's also lots of results for Bathing Beauty and Sennett Bathing Beauties mixed in there. I thought I found coverage of this subject here and here but apparently "bathing beauties" was a type of porcelain doll (unrelated to the later 1980s brand of bath-toy dolls) around 1900-1940 or so. So there's lots of results under that name, but they're all about things other than this article's subject. - Aoidh (talk) 04:51, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I too couldn't find anything substantial apart from the sources named above and a Pinterest post showcasing one of these dolls. Much as I like the Tonka company, alas, this article fails WP:GNG indeed. TH1980 (talk) 19:29, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and above fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 04:32, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I believe article fails WP:GNG Equine-man (talk) 16:57, 12 January 2023 (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.