Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gentry Miller (2nd nomination)

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. Joyous! | Talk 01:33, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gentry Miller[edit]

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

Miller's only claim to fame is being Miss Kansas USA. This is not enough to establish notability. A search on google for additional sources only seems to bring up her Linkedin page, not a reliable indepdent source, that shows she has been working as an obtometry store manager. The previous discussion that resulted in keep was flawed on many levels. First off, someone claimed we have two international sources. One is literally a caption from a picture of her with 9 other teenagers who were finalists in Miss Teen USA. The other is not working, but appears to be another caption, probably with others. Neither is substantial coverage. The substantial coverage is either feel good stories from her college newspaper, not the stuff of reliable GNG passing, or local coverage related to her beauty pageant activities, not enough to establish permanent notability. Also, the first discussion had some attacking the deltion nomination because it tried to use the model guidelines. There was a discussion back in August on weather to make a formal set of notability guidelines for beauty pageant contestants. It closed with a statement that such should be attempted and then brought back to RfC. However the general majority opinion was that state beauty pageant winners are not default notable. There is nothing suggesting that Miller is notable. John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:15, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep based on the previous AfD - argueably just enough to get over the GNG line here. Ok, maybe there hasn't been much recent coverage - but this does not automatically mean that she isn't notable. Mdann52 (talk) 21:16, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I've looked at each of the sources and read the prior AFD. Everything is routine coverage of a winner of a state level pageant, which is not sufficient for GNG per past AFD precedent. There would need to be something more substantial. She is a high school valedictorian and university graduate but there is nothing beyond that. I found a video clip where she said if the didn't win Miss USA, she would stay in pharmaceutical sales which is what she is probably still doing. MB 02:41, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kansas-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 16:28, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I normally don't like to take a position to overturn a previous AFD, but in this case I think they got it wrong. There might be significant coverage that just hasn't been added to the article and if so that should be considered.--Paul McDonald (talk) 17:01, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:40, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 19:32, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for lack of sources per WP:N. The Witchita Eagle is the only secondary source that provides non-trivial coverage of the article subject, all other links are either a) dead, b) a list of pageants or pageant winners or c) an article about a Miss Kansas winner that has a line mentioning Gentry Miller winning Miss Teen that same day. If an additional secondary source can be found that is specifically focused on this article's subject, I am willing to accept it barely passing notability guidelines, but at the moment it very clearly does not. -Markeer 22:23, 1 December 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.