Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valentina (drag queen) (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. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:04, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Valentina (drag queen)[edit]

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

I am also nominating the following related pages because of their similarity to this one. The reasons for their deletion and change to a redirect are the exact same as this one.

Lack of relevance. Other queens on the show have also had their pages deleted for lack of relevance. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acid Betty, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tatianna (drag queen), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derrick Barry (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derrick Barry, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valentina (drag queen), and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sasha Velour. Most of the points still hold up. It's a minimally sourced WP:BLP of a person whose primary claim to notability is having been a contestant on a reality show. I'd understand if she won the season, the winners tend to have more claims to notability but in this case, she hasn't won. Oath2order (talk) 15:47, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - As per the other discussions. Oath2order (talk) 15:51, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. *sigh* There are many, many sources that could be used to expand this article. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:55, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: @Oath2order: Perhaps you are still in the process of rounding up links, but I think this page needs to show that multiple articles have been nominated for deletion. For the record, I think Nina Bo'nina Brown, Trinity Taylor, Valentina (drag queen), and Sasha Velour should all be kept. You've included links above to past discussions resulting in delete/merge votes, but there are many other notable contestants, so one can't simply assume non-notability based on your argument. There are plenty of sources to expand these articles, and this is another trigger nomination. I really wish editors could be given more time to expand articles... ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:00, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The issue of the matter is not that there's sources to expand the article. The issue is that all that they've done is been contestants on a reality show. As far as I'm aware, Valentina, Trinity, Nina, and Sasha have not done anything post-show that qualifies them for relevancy. Side note: You do have plenty of time to expand the articles (minus Sasha because that's already been closed). The Sasha Nomination for Deletion took 6 days to close. Oath2order (talk) 16:12, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, well, I'm basing my argument on sourcing, not the fact that they are reality show competitors. Again, there are many notable contestants, so let's not hold show participation against them. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:20, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, for the record, I tried turning Sasha Velour into a stub and included the AfD nomination template as part of this group nomination, but the article has been redirected despite my appeal on its talk page. There are now drafts at Draft:Sasha Velour and Draft:Sasha Velour (drag queen), and it's quite frustrating that editors can't have an active article to work on in the main space. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:23, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Sasha, given that she has already had a discussion about her, should stay as a redirect until proven otherwise. I'm not holding show participation against them. I'm holding the fact that they have not done anything else notable outside of the show against them. Oath2order (talk) 16:41, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's not actually true for each of these individuals, but I'll leave that for others to judge. In the meantime, I've requested restoration of the Velour article at Talk:Sasha Velour, before going to deletion review. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:49, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If it's not true, then I look forward to seeing what you intend on putting on those pages. Good luck. Oath2order (talk) 17:17, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:05, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:06, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Oath2order: is this a bundled AfD? If so, please make sure it is formatted properly so !voters know what is included. - Bri (talk) 17:27, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where do I go about doing that Oath2order (talk) 17:28, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Instructions are in the link WP:MULTIAFD. Bri (talk) 17:29, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Bri. This is helpful. I knew there was a procedure for bundled AfDs but wasn't sure of a specific page to suggest. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:41, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-winning competitors on reality shows are not automatically deemed to pass WP:GNG just because of the purely WP:ROUTINE coverage that they automatically generate by virtue of being on a reality show — every queen on RPDR, absolutely without exception, always gets a blip of WP:BLP1E coverage in the first day or two immediately after she loses a lipsync and sashays away, so that isn't coverage that can be used to show her as more notable than the norm in and of itself. Rather, what's required is for the substance and sourcing to show her as notable for more than just the fact of being on RPDR itself: Alaska, for example, did not get an article because RPDR, but because she leveraged her RPDR exposure into recording an album that hit the Billboard charts. (And then she won AS2, yes, but that was just gravy because she'd already cleared WP:NMUSIC.) The queen who wins the season in a few weeks will get an article on that basis — but merely being on the season is not grounds for a standalone article in and of itself, and anybody who doesn't win still has to build her notability the same way as any queen who wasn't on the show at all: by working her kitty off and getting media coverage for that. It's simply WP:TOOSOON to know if any of these queens will manage that. And just to be clear, I'm a loyal RPDR viewer who gets together with my gaggle of gays every week at the bar to watch it in a party atmosphere — although I'm going to miss the finale this year because I have to go out of town for family stuff, harrumph harrumph — so this is not about lack of familiarity with any of them. But "was on a reality show" is not a Wikipedia inclusion criterion in and of itself — regardless of whether they're a drag queen on RPDR or an EMS worker appearing on Survivor, a person gets an article either for winning a reality show, or for leveraging their 15 minutes of fame into something more than "appeared on a reality show and lost, the end." Bearcat (talk) 17:55, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per reasoning above and WP:NOTABILITY Brocicle (talk) 19:19, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Doesn't meet the notability criteria. Appeared on a TV show and lost. Thousands of people do that every year. Yintan 22:48, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again, someone appearing on a TV show and losing is not a reason to delete an article. We need to base our reasoning on secondary coverage. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:40, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and that secondary coverage has to be in the context of more than just the WP:ROUTINE level of coverage that every RPDR queen will always get while the show is running. Every queen gets a handful of "WHY THE HELL DID YOU LEAVE THE MASK ON, VALENTINA?" interviews in Entertainment Weekly and Bustle the next morning after she sashays away — not one losing queen in the entire history of the show has ever failed to garner a brief spike of WP:BLP1E coverage in those first few days. What we require is that the secondary coverage sustains itself beyond that initial blip of "was on the show and lost" and into "did something else notable afterward". As I already noted, for example, Alaska didn't qualify for an article right away the moment she sashayed away the first time just because a couple of "Alaska sashays away" articles appeared in the media outlets that consistently grant that type of coverage to every queen who sashays away every week — she qualified for one when she cleared WP:NMUSIC by releasing an album and getting secondary source coverage for that. (And then she won AS2, granted, but her NMUSIC pass meant the article was already in place before that happened.) Bearcat (talk) 19:08, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Did you fail to read the first sentence of my !vote, Another Believer? Cheers, Yintan 06:52, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural comment: I don't mean to be difficult here, but I still don't think this nomination has been submitted properly via WP:BUNDLE. Are we discussing just Valentina, or multiple individuals? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy now? Oath2order (talk) 03:18, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The additions should have been placed at the top of the page, so that the bundling is clear right up front, rather than at the bottom of the page so that a newcomer has to read the whole discussion to find out. I've moved it up as an addendum to your original nomination statement accordingly. Bearcat (talk) 17:53, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:06, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:06, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for all three – I do not see any independent notability enough to warrant a separate article now. All that is present is easily presentable in the season 9 article of RPDR. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 10:03, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Valentina might not have done anything at the moment but let's wait until the show has ended before considering to delete this page. Also I basically filled it. Sorry...Littlerocketeer (talk) 14:58, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Articles are not kept just because the subject might accomplish something more notable in the future than they have as of today; any editor could claim that about literally anything or anyone that exists at all. We keep or delete an article on the basis of whether a valid notability claim, and the depth of reliable source coverage needed to support it, already exists today. Bearcat (talk) 15:20, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting due to the bundling issue. Early comments were on the nominated page only, not the later bundle.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SpinningSpark 12:43, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect each page to the relevant season page. Oath2order (talk) 19:11, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as Nina and Valentina as a completely run of the mill drag queens and/or reality contestants. As noted, we almost always delete articles about TV reality show contestants except those who win, place, and show. Generally, for a drag queen to be notable, she must be a queen first; she has to have won a major title such as "Miss Gay Maryland", "Homecoming Queen" of Cherry Grove, New York, "Miss Fire Island", or "Empress of New York". Having known such "royalty", I can see Nina and Valentina aren't there yet. Like Bearcat, I've seen a few drag shows in my day. Furthermore, I am proud to be personal friends with a few. Trinity is a marginal case; she allegedly won titles out of Parliament House and The Edge, two nationally-known venues. If sourced, she might be notable. Bearian (talk) 03:01, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be fair and point out that holding a title on the traditional pageant circuit is not the only way a drag queen can attain notability for our purposes. It's certainly a path to notability, but I can think of many queens who attained notability without going that route at all: Alaska Thunderfuck and Jackie Beat (and RuPaul, for that matter) did it with music, Bianca Del Rio and Peaches Christ did it with comedy — in fact, Wikipedia probably has more articles about drag queens who attained their notability without going anywhere near the pageant circuit than we do about traditional pageant queens. (In fact, I know we do, given that the only queen in the entire Miss Gay America who actually has an article is Alyssa Edwards, and trust me when I say that RPDR has far more to do with why she has an article than Miss Gay America does.) So no, these girls don't necessarily have to win a pageant title per se to become notable — but apart from the queen who wins next Friday, they do have to accomplish something more than just being on a season of a reality show and having Instagram followers. Bearcat (talk) 03:24, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all three: Only claim to notability is a single losing reality show appearance (covered in extreme depth), fails WP:GNG and also fails WP:UNDUE. Wikipedia is not a blow-by-blow recounting of reality TV series. - GretLomborg (talk) 04:19, 16 June 2017 (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.