Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Grand Argentina

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:47, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Argentina

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

Series of non notable national beauty pageants. I am not nominating the international main pageant, which seems to have some notability, but having checked a few of the national ones, I see no individual notability for things like Miss Grand Nepal [1] or Miss Grand Argentina [2] or Miss Grand Kosovo [3] or even Miss Grand UK [4]. Fram (talk) 08:49, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated are:

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:53, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:53, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:53, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all We don't have "Find sources" templates and Template:la (link article) for 25 of the 26 articles listed. As for evidence of non-notability, the nomination stipulates to only "having checked a few", and there is no evidence of WP:BEFORE D1 for the four titles mentioned. The nomination needs to have analyzed the alternatives to deletion, as it is given that there is a wp:notable international main pageant, and it is certainly not obvious why these topics should be deleted and can't be merged. The simple rule is: if there is no one willing to do the work to prepare the community for a deletion discussion, there is no need for a deletion discussion. Unscintillating (talk) 15:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That has to be a list of some of the most unconvincing keep reasons ever. Keep because you don't get the automatic "find sources" template? Really? And D1? Do you want me to perform a Google Books search for these? You are aware that Google Books results appear in regular Google as well? Bloating the nomination with things like 0 results and 0 results? Of course, there isn't even one book source about the international competition[5], so expecting them for the national qualifications is a bit optimistic. Please treat WP:BEFORE with some common sense and not as gospel. Merging these is useless, I suppose you mean redirecting as there is nothing worth merging anyway. Lower level competitions don't get kept because the top-level competition is notable, so why should this be any different? Fram (talk) 07:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom - No evidence of any notability, Only crap I've found are all FB/Twitter related. –Davey2010 • (talk) 14:03, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all, as per nomination. Did not meet the general notability guideline--Richie Campbell (talk) 02:39, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 08:06, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:26, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all a beauty pageant of the scale of Miss Grand (country) is notable. Passes WP:NEVENT. --Mr. Guye (talk) 20:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Any evidence for this? Empty claims of "is notable" without providing any sources to back them up normally get ignored by the closing admin. Fram (talk) 07:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Above you object to the due process protections that require nominations to include evidence of a lack of sources, but here you want evidence and assert that closing admins will require such. Are you claiming that closing admins treat keep !votes with standards unlike those that apply to delete nominations? Unscintillating (talk) 00:10, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did provide evidence, I objected to your burocratic statement that "we don't have the find sources templates for all of them". Having a template added to every nominated article would be no evidence of anything (positive or negative), but rejecting a nomination for such a reason is kindergarten behaviour. And in any case, I can't prove that there are no sources or notability, I can only state that I looked and didn't find the required evidence of notability, and I have given sufficient examples of where and how I looked. But the opposite, claims that the pageants are notable, should be shown with evidence. That's standard AfD behaviour, yes. When someone claims it meets NEVENT, then they should provide some pointers to the coverage required in NEVENT. Fram (talk) 06:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The individual country events don't seem to have generated enough attention from reliable third parties. Lets keep the main pageant page for the time being and delete the rest. - Shiftchange (talk) 00:43, 23 September 2014 (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.