Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Grand

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. No prejudice towards somebody renominating this sooner rather than later - it really deserved a higher participation rate of non-involved editors. Daniel (talk) 02:15, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand[edit]

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

Miss Grand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article was created to work around past deletion agreements. Miss Grand is the same as Miss Grand International, which was agreed to be deleted, and now simply redirects here. It is a non-notable international pageant. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 22:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This article was originally created to cover the entire franchise, which is covered in-depth by independent reliable sources (see those cited in the original version), and is notable. Most of these sources are primarily about the flagship Miss Grand Thailand pageant, which appears to be more notable than its international counterpart (see my comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Grand Thailand (2nd nomination)). However, other editors have since attempted to hijack the article into covering Miss Grand International instead of properly creating a separate article. The previous AfDs did not see serious attempts at identifying reliable sources, and instead were pile-ons where participants made WP:JUSTNOTNOTABLE arguments based on the articles' perceived fancruft and promotional writing. That said, there has been plenty of English-language coverage of the international pageant, mostly focused on the controversies it's generated (The Independent, Mic.com, Khaosod English, Stuff.co.nz). There's also coverage of the pageant's support of a Myanmar contestant's anti-coup protests (The Diplomat, Khaosod English, Eleven Myanmar). While they do not go into in-depth detail about the pageant's operations, they might still constitute enough significant coverage to satisfy the WP:GNG. If this is agreed on and Miss Grand International is deemed notable, split the article into Miss Grand Thailand (supported by the original sources) and Miss Grand International (supported by more recent ones including my examples). Otherwise, purge the irrelevant content and rename to Miss Grand Thailand, so that further hijacking does not occur. --Paul_012 (talk) 06:09, 20 June 2021 (UTC), updated 09:21, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep BBC, CNN picked up news from it. [1], [2] What might be valid reason years ago may no longer applies. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 11:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:ORGCRIT. The sources above are not about the pageant itself, but about pageant contestants. Most of the articles are about a single controversy surrounding Miss Iceland quitting the pageant weeks before the event even took place over being told to lose weight and the subsequent backlash over social media. This isn't significant coverage of the pageant itself, but a story about fat shaming that is rather trivial and tabloid in quality. It doesn't provide any notability for the pageant, as the actual pageant itself is not even a significant part of the story (as it hadn't happened yet). The other articles are primarily about Han Lay's work as an activist (the reigning Miss Grand Myanmar), and the pageant is only tangentially connected in those stories as she is the primary subject and not the pageant. While her activism may be notable, it doesn't extend to the pageant itself. Notability is not inherited. The only other story is a controversy over a crowned winner being replaced, which is essentially routine tabloid news. So, what kind of sources would be significant coverage? Sources where the pageant as an organization is the main topic. In these sources I would expect to find detailed information like who founded it, an overview of it's history, details of its operations, etc. Those don't seem to exist in any independent sources, so for me this a clearly non-notable. On a side note, I believe a pageant as an organization is held to a higher standard of sourcing per WP:SIRS, and this clearly doesn't meet that standard. HighKing am I correct that pageants are evaluated under WP:ORGCRIT?4meter4 (talk) 03:08, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
4meter4 I don't believe this should be evaluated under WP:NCORP, it isn't an organization or company per se, it is an annual event. Probably GNG, I don't think there's an SNG covering recurring events. HighKing++ 13:22, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
HighKing I'm not sure I agree with you. Pageants operate under business licenses, sometimes as for profit companies and sometimes as non-profit businesses. They file tax returns. They also have business managers and full time employees. Yes their business is built around a contest, but it is still a business much in the same way film /theatre production companies are businesses or wedding coordinators are businesses. Think of it this way, events are products for event planners much in the same way pageants are products for pageant organizers.4meter4 (talk) 17:33, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I already laid out such sources in the above linked-to discussion. For convenience, I'll quote it here again.

      The subject (both the franchise and the national pageant) has been covered by multiple third-party sources, including this Positioning Magazine article about its origins, business platform, and format[3]; this Post Today article about the competition among domestic beauty pageants[4]; and this Isranews piece looking at the company's posted financials [5].

      --Paul_012 (talk) 06:23, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Grand International (3rd nomination).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:12, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That is debatable.4meter4 (talk) 17:35, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Paul_012 Could you not argue with every person who disagrees with you? We've seen your argument and weren't convinced, 3 people have the right to still vote delete. PageantsPlanet (talk) 21:07, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • In your case, I saw that you were commenting from a brand new article, so I pointed out the need to make policy-based arguments. Deletion discussions are not votes. You're arguing very confidently for a new user, though. Is there a previous account that should be disclosed? --Paul_012 (talk) 00:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Someone disagreed with me so they must be doing something wrong." Go ahead and report me buddy, I have nothing to hide. Now stop getting personal and stop haranguing everyone who disagrees with you. PageantsPlanet (talk) 02:03, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, I disagree per the rationale that the primary references are about a certain controversy. While there are several other events about the event, like allegation of cultural appropriation as mentioned here, stepping down of Anea Garcia as mentioned here. Also, the reasoning provided as to why the controversy about Miss Iceland would not contribute to the subject's notability, is not adequately sound. The subject passes WP:SIGCOV and WP:NCORP. Chirota (talk) 05:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:21, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I strongly agree with Paul_012. Btw, so poor WP:IDONTLIKE are arrived there🤣. Unfortunately, AfD is not a vote poll.... So sad. 😚 VocalIndia (talk) 07:57, 14 July 2021 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Miss_Grand&oldid=1033985042"