User talk:Mauriziok/Miss Grand

{{olddelrev | date = 15 January 2021 | result = '''G4 deletion overturned''' | page = Log/2021 January 15 | oldid = }} {{WikiProject Beauty pageants}} {{WikiProject Thailand}} {{annual readership}}

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. And WP:SALT NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:05, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand International[edit]

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

Delete and salt . Promotion of a nonnotable pageant. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:34, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete, more references could potentially redeem. As far as the article itself, the only notable references I saw in the article were CNN/People and those articles used unflattering titles related to Miss Iceland's body weight. Also, even though the pageant was held in the USA, I found a lack of American news coverage from mainstream sources. But the article could potentially be a keep as Google News listed a number of notable newspaper references in non-American/European countries and it is an international pageant (Times of India, etc.).[1] Also, on the positive side, I googled the pageant's name and found a ton of search results (About 1,690,000 results).[2] The beauty pageant appear to have a following as some of its YouTube videos have high view counts (tens of thousands of views). For example, its main video for 2016 has over 170,000 views.[3] But that could merely be due the nature of the video (swimsuit competition). Its Facebook page has over a million likes, but in these days of reports of fake likes, this doesn't carry a lot of weight. Knox490 (talk)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete & salt due to persistent promotionalism. No indications of notability or importance. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:03, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not a vehicle for promotion. Exemplo347 (talk) 11:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete & salt per Exemplo347. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 11:56, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to the souces failing to indicate notabilty: they are either passing mentions, in the contaxt of the models, or SPS / WP:PRIMARY. Either way, mass failure of WP:GNG requirements. — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 12:02, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete & salt for not being notable, only trying to use Wikipedia to create notability (and also delete and salt all lists, templates and other fancruft that derive from it...). - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 12:13, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not Beautipedia. L3X1 (distant write) 14:33, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTPROMO MarnetteD|Talk 19:08, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Snow delete per above. Lepricavark (talk) 19:14, 16 April 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.

Contested deletion[edit]

I would like to remind User:Richie Campbell that WP:G4 prohibits re-creation of deleted material, not topics. Previous AfDs do not serve as a perpetual rejection of a topic's notability. For convenience, I quote (with added emphasis:)

This applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion. It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies, and content that has been moved to user space or converted to a draft for explicit improvement (but not simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy). This criterion also does not cover content undeleted via a deletion review, or that was only deleted via proposed deletion (including deletion discussions closed as "soft delete") or speedy deletion.

The criterion clearly does not apply to this article. Please avoid indiscriminate G4 tagging of articles unrelated to deleted copies. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:03, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Protection[edit]

Please protect this page. Because there are more than 50 languages written around the world about Miss Grand, Thanks EmmyPert (talk) 02:13, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WEIGHT issues of controversy section[edit]

I've removed a few of the entries of the "Controversey" section, which has ballooned to be larger than the rest of the article (one about one contestant insulting a contestant from a different pageant; that seems more appropriate to be included in articles about those subjects, not this pageant). I also deleted an entry about a fake passport, per WP:NOTNEWS; that doesn't seem to be a "controversey" for the pageant itself, rather a legal matter for the contestant. I also don't believe that a summary of all of the controversy belongs in the lede; to include something like that in the lede, we'd need sources that suggested that this pageant is known primarily for it's controversies, which I'm not convinced of. I'm also curious why this pageant has been targeted with so much criticism, most of it from recent edits; I note that Miss Universe doesn't have a "Controversy" section, despite the Steve Harvey sage that made international news. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk

The Steve Harvey controversy can be found in the lede of Miss Universe 2015 article and some other controversies including other major pageants were included in the beauty pageant article. On a second look, I agree with you with the fake passport. Regarding the summary of all the controversy in the lede for Miss Grand, the pageant is well-known for controversies in the pageant industry beyond what you read in the article, here's a sample from Rappler. About the "Discrediting Miss Universe," this involved the owner/organizer (Nawat) of Miss Grand and was posted in the official social media account of Miss Grand as per source.Richie Campbell (talk) 05:11, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend Richie Campbell making and create the new Miss Grand International page in each year and put details the controversy at each page like Miss Universe 2015. EmmyPert (talk) 10:30, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As per the previous AfD, we do not make sub-articles for pageants that have been deleted as non-notable. Black Kite (talk) 10:41, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please clarify why Richie Campbell want to delete this page that she report to delete and put all negative things into this page. EmmyPert (talk) 03:35, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 March 2021[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. No consensus to move. Notability can be discussed at a separate articles for deletion discussion. (non-admin closure) – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 14:59, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand → Miss Grand International – Move to "Miss Grand International" Should name article specifically and seperate Miss Grand Thailand from Miss Grand International.--Dinnerbrone (talk) 09:58, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No. Miss Grand International was previously deleted as a non-notable pageant here. The redirect was only unsalted so that it could redirect to Miss Grand. This should be closed. Black Kite (talk) 14:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it non-notable pageant? It is recognized as one of five grand slam pageants by Global beauties, fouded in 1998. --Dinnerbrone (talk) 15:54, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- See the link in my statement (Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Miss_Grand_International_(3rd_nomination). Because it was deleted as non-notable, if you wish to re-create the article, it should be done as Draft:Miss Grand International and then submitted via articles for creation. Black Kite (talk) 15:58, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and SALT, both this article/title and the redirect (again), per Black Kite. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 17:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not move EmmyPert (talk) 17:45, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed merge of Miss Grand International 2021 into Miss Grand[edit]

merging already done with Miss Grand International 2020 Estopedist1 (talk) 06:13, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why it is not about miss grand it is only about miss grand international 2021 pageant . I want to complete all about this to Wikipedia because your all deleting my every creation your are targeting me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boboraks (talk • contribs) 07:08, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why you are merching this page I have given reference to all information why Boboraks (talk) 07:41, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is moot now, since Black Kite has already redirected the article. A merger wouldn't have been appropriate anyway. That said, I think discussion to reconsider the notability of Miss Grand International, and whether it warrants a standalone article (or a series of articles), is warranted, since the last AfD was four years ago, new sources have emerged, and consensus can change. Maybe the best venue in this case would be Deletion Review. --Paul_012 (talk) 10:04, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]