| Revision as of 20:18, 9 September 2014 editThe Banner (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers125,454 edits →Marcelina Vahekeni← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:54, 9 September 2014 edit undoTrackinfo (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers126,470 edits →Marcelina VahekeniNext edit → | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
| *'''Procedural keep''' is a good description. This slew of nominations looks like an attack on this traditional claim to notability. The amount of coverage every one of these contestants get, at what is essentially a media event, certainly meets GNG. I found the LA Times, Seattle P/I and Las Vegas Sun does an individual article on each contestant, much less the celebrity and fashion magazines that do coverage on each contestant. And to show the ] bad faith nomination of this particular contestant, there is an article I sourced in Time Magazine of her modeling a controversial national costume, apparently missed because the OP didn't bother to look. I think all of these noms should be '''Keep''' wholesale with the same disregard the OP used in making the noms. ] (]) 18:21, 9 September 2014 (UTC) | *'''Procedural keep''' is a good description. This slew of nominations looks like an attack on this traditional claim to notability. The amount of coverage every one of these contestants get, at what is essentially a media event, certainly meets GNG. I found the LA Times, Seattle P/I and Las Vegas Sun does an individual article on each contestant, much less the celebrity and fashion magazines that do coverage on each contestant. And to show the ] bad faith nomination of this particular contestant, there is an article I sourced in Time Magazine of her modeling a controversial national costume, apparently missed because the OP didn't bother to look. I think all of these noms should be '''Keep''' wholesale with the same disregard the OP used in making the noms. ] (]) 18:21, 9 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
| :*FYI: ]. And instead of throwing with PAs, you better start reading what I wrote before. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 20:12, 9 September 2014 (UTC) | :*FYI: ]. And instead of throwing with PAs, you better start reading what I wrote before. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 20:12, 9 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
| ::Are you suggesting that because the article creator/subsequent editors are in cahoots with the pagent that somehow it makes the article irrelevant? There probably are commercial interests involved. Her modeling career certainly is promoted. But it would be irresponsible for wikipedia to remove all content that might be supporting commercial interests. We report facts. You cannot deny that she won the National title and that she appeared at the World patent. Commercial and prearranged as that press event is, that does not erase the press coverage she got. ] (]) 20:54, 9 September 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:54, 9 September 2014
Marcelina Vahekeni
- Marcelina Vahekeni (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)
fails WP:GNG. No independent sources for this BLP The Banner talk 12:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
- Delete 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)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Procedural keep - Represented her country at the indisputably notable Miss Universe. That is usually sufficient for a stub article. Mabalu (talk) 09:57, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- A simple Google Test gives a number of less than 15 thousands hits, including doubles, related and social media. That boiled down to a massive 250 unique hits. The Banner talk 10:45, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica 10:04, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- Redirect to Miss Angola, along with four or five others who are in the same boat (i.e. did not place in the Miss Universe contest). Clarityfiend (talk) 10:59, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- Procedural keep is a good description. This slew of nominations looks like an attack on this traditional claim to notability. The amount of coverage every one of these contestants get, at what is essentially a media event, certainly meets GNG. I found the LA Times, Seattle P/I and Las Vegas Sun does an individual article on each contestant, much less the celebrity and fashion magazines that do coverage on each contestant. And to show the WP:BEFORE bad faith nomination of this particular contestant, there is an article I sourced in Time Magazine of her modeling a controversial national costume, apparently missed because the OP didn't bother to look. I think all of these noms should be Keep wholesale with the same disregard the OP used in making the noms. Trackinfo (talk) 18:21, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- FYI: Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Mrdhimas. And instead of throwing with PAs, you better start reading what I wrote before. The Banner talk 20:12, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- Are you suggesting that because the article creator/subsequent editors are in cahoots with the pagent that somehow it makes the article irrelevant? There probably are commercial interests involved. Her modeling career certainly is promoted. But it would be irresponsible for wikipedia to remove all content that might be supporting commercial interests. We report facts. You cannot deny that she won the National title and that she appeared at the World patent. Commercial and prearranged as that press event is, that does not erase the press coverage she got. Trackinfo (talk) 20:54, 9 September 2014 (UTC)