Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ron Wear

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 keep. postdlf (talk) 23:24, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Wear

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

Completing nomination on behalf of an IP editor, whose rationale was posted at the article's talk page and is reproduced verbatim below. On the merits, I have no opinion. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 15:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am submitting this article for deletion. As far as I can tell, this does not meet any of the criteria listed at Wikipedia:Notability - specifically, WP:ANYBIO which states:

Generally, a person who is "part of the enduring historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books on that field, by historians. A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists. An actor who has been featured in magazines has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple magazine feature articles, by magazine article writers. An actor or TV personality who has "an independent biography" has been written about, in depth, in a book, by an independent biographer.

Since no other Mr. World Canada has a Wikipedia article, there is nothing noteworthy about Ron Wear that makes an article on him worthy for inclusion. His passing relationship with Tara Teng seems to be the only reason an article was created for him in the first place, as the only page linking to him is the page for Tara Teng. However, to quote again from WP:BIO, Ron Wear's vague association with Ms. Teng does not confer notability onto him.

That person A has a relationship with well-known person B, such as being a spouse or child, is not a reason for a standalone article on A (unless significant coverage can be found on A); see Relationships do not confer notability. However, person A may be included in the related article on B. For example, Brooklyn Beckham and Jason Allen Alexander are included in the articles on David Beckham and Britney Spears, respectively, and the links, Brooklyn Beckham and Jason Allen Alexander, are merely redirects to those articles.

The sources cited to form the bulk of this article are superfluous at best. For example, footnote [9], which states that Ron Wear is an active swimmer and yoga practitioner. Not only is this information irrelevant (under the guidelines at WP:NOTE), but it fails to meet the criteria on diversity of sources. The article reads, in its current form, as a promotional biography of a former beauty pageant winner who has accomplished nothing to make him worthy of a Wikipedia entry.

69.158.90.116 (talk) 23:56, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 05:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 05:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 05:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The fact that Ron Wear is apparently the only winner from this particular pageant with his own Wikipedia page tells me that simply being a pageant winner does not create notability, as if it did there would likely be other similar pages. Further, the article does not provide any evidence for Mr. Wear's distinctiveness from other winners of the same pageant, as it mostly discusses events he participated in after winning and it is incredibly likely that none of these events are out of the ordinary for such a winner or have any kind of historical merit that require documentation. Finally, as noted in the original move for deletion, the majority of the article is dedicated to documenting Wear's professional relationship with another pageant winner. This also tells me that Mr. Wear does not have significant notability as if he did his article would not have to be padded with irrelevant information about the fact that he once met another pageant winner, especially as any rational person would be able to assume that he has likely met other pageant winners and this does not need to be documented. Essentially the page reads like it was either a.) written by Mr. Wear's publicist or b.) Written by Ms. Teng's publicist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdh9 (talk • contribs) 17:45, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, winner of major competition, Mr. World Canada 2010. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 00:59, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No opinion regarding the status of the article at this time, but Mr. World Canada is not the highest tier of that particular competition: it is the Canadian qualifiers for Mister World. I am dubious that the national title is sufficient in and of itself to confer notability (and have not evaluated the subject to determine if notability has been otherwise demonstrated). Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 18:43, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Admin--please don't decide on this until CU etc. have run their course at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cactusjackbangbang. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:38, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. — Cirt (talk) 18:49, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr^\ talk / 04:16, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. From the newspaper articles cited there appears to be significant coverage of this individual in ten secondary sources. If in the future a "List of Mr. World Canada winners" is written, and if this individual has not by then achieved notability for other events, then there is a potential to redirect this article to there, but for the time being at least I think there is enough independent coverage to justify maintaining the article.CurtisNaito (talk) 08:28, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mr. Guye (talk) 01:28, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 17:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Mr. World Canada, which already has some of the same content. Per WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST, I don't think it matters so much that no other winner has an article. That could just be because no one has gotten around to creating one. But winning Mr. World Canada doesn't seem to have generated that much coverage. Most of the sources in the article are fairly trivial one-line mentions. The best ones were from his agency and the TV station where he hosted a show, but those aren't independent. And I couldn't find any other good ones. I think his best shot at notability would be getting some significant acting roles. If that happens, this article could be revived. – Margin1522 (talk) 20:13, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the sourcing in the article appear to be sufficient to establish notability under WP:GNG --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:40, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as coverage in reliable third-party sources appears to push this subject across the verifiability and notability thresholds of WP:GNG. That this is the first Wikipedia article about a winner of this competition is not relevant as somebody has to be first. (Notability is not inherited but nor is it dependent on the existence of similar articles.) - Dravecky (talk) 09:00, 21 February 2015 (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.