Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Csilla Molnár

Add links
Source: 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 keep. Regardless of the significance of the Miss Hungary pageant, WP:GNG appears to be met. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:01, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Csilla Molnár

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

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

This very odd article relies on a primary source... the subject’s website... and an obituary which confirms “the Miss Hungary competition is not connected with the Miss Universe pageant or any other international contest.” So she didn’t meet notability for pageant winners anyway. “Model commits suicide” isn’t notability. Trillfendi (talk) 20:17, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:44, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:44, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:44, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:45, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If she hit the LA Times in 1986 I'm sure she had further international coverage too, not so easily findable from that far back. Have added her imdb record, which shows a documentary "About the first Hungarian Beauty Contest in 1985, that led to a tragic end" (yes, I know imdb isn't a RS). Anyone who reads Hungarian could certainly use the many sources listed at the end of her Hungarian wikipedia article to expand this one. PamD 10:19, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You know good and well that IMDb is not a reliable source on here. Trillfendi (talk) 11:33, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And I said so above. PamD 12:48, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And there's a film about the contest and her death, mentioned in many snippet-view sources in Google books and a couple of more accessible sources, which I've added. Certainly notable. PamD 13:28, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It’s still not worth keeping. She didn’t even compete in a notable pageant. The only thing you deem notable about her is her death. It doesn’t make sense. Non-notable people have a whole channel dedicated to documentaries about their deaths: Investigation Discovery. Trillfendi (talk) 13:36, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, she is the most well known beauty queen in Hungary, because of her fate and political situation in Socialist Hungary. Another sources: [1]. --Norden1990 (talk) 18:12, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The July 1986 Reuters/UPI wire stories on her were picked up by Houston Chronicle (12 July 1986, p 18), Chicago-Sun Times (13 July 1986, p 5), San Francisco Chronicle (12 July 1986, p 3), Chicago Tribune (12 July 1986, p 4), and Orlando Sentinel (12 July 1986, p A10), among others. So WP:GNG-level coverage is obvious. The question is whether this falls under WP:BLP1E or not. The answer, I think, is no, and the clue is in the content of the RS sources above, which uniformly claim that excessive media attention to her beauty pageant win led to her suicide. I do not expect anyone to produce URLs to 1980s Hungarian press coverage of her win. However, the reliable sources say that the prior significant coverage existed. So, given that the subject received significant coverage at the time of her pageant win and significant coverage of her subsequent suicide, it's not WP:BLP1E. Bakazaka (talk) 19:08, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Again I say, the LA Times source clearly stated that "The Miss Hungary competition is not connected with the Miss Universe pageant or any other international contest", therefore the pageant she won wasn't of any notability. Winning that contest clearly meant nothing besides driving her to take her own life. Apparently the only reasons she was "harassed" was because at that time in history, beauty pageants were frowned upon while the people suffered under communism. Certainly isn't worth taking up space here, especially with not having sources for her actual life besides her own "website". This isn't legacy.com Trillfendi (talk) 19:29, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you meant to reply to some other comment, as nothing in your reply responds to my !vote rationale. Bakazaka (talk) 19:39, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I only speak extremely basic Hungarian, but reading that article didn’t do anything to convince the idea that it’s worth “keeping”. It’s only “source” is also her website! Nothing out there actually goes in depth about her life independently. Routine coverage about her suicide at best. Trillfendi (talk) 17:34, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There is enough new RS per PamD and Bakazaka for at least a technical pass of WP:GNG. Clearly, she was notable in her time. At a WP:COMMONSENSE level, a winner of a 1985 major beauty pagent in a large country would have had material RS on her from national sources at that time; which is not easily EN-searchable online. Britishfinance (talk) 15:52, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If people could read they would see that it clearly says the pageant was not part of the Miss Universe system or any other international contest. Trillfendi (talk) 16:06, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As I already pointed out, Miss Hungary is connected with international contests. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:14, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I can (and did) read. Miss Hungary is WP-notable enough to have its own WP-article, despite not being part of the "Miss Universe system". Your original nom was fair, but per WP:HEY, the GNG issues have been at least technically addressed, imho. Britishfinance (talk) 16:18, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Even on 20 January 2019, on what would have been her 50th-birthday, Hungarian newspaper, 168 Óra, ran an article on her (e.g. WP:SIGCOV) "Today it would be 50 years for the tragic queen of beauty, Csilla Molnár". Search via her image on google, and it leads you to lots of RS Hungarian newspaper coverage. Britishfinance (talk) 17:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Added a few more refs from mainstream Hungarian newspapers from 2015 to 2019 on her; she seems even today to be a notable subject for them. Britishfinance (talk) 21:00, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, Huwiki is one thing, Commons another. But I think there's a "Fair use" rationale which can be used to add a copy of a non-free image of a dead person in some circs. PamD 23:48, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah okay, thanks for that, I was wondering why en-WP was defying my attemps to work out the :hu: link to it (and all permutations). thanks. Britishfinance (talk) 23:58, 26 March 2019 (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/Csilla_Molnár&oldid=1072130658"