Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Intercontinental 2015

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. czar ⨹ 22:42, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Intercontinental 2015

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

Given that the rest of the Miss International articles have all been deleted, this one should be too. All sources are WP:PRIMARY, with zero references to support notability of the pageant itself. Cannot see sufficient international coverage to show that this international pageant passes notability requirements, as per the previous Miss Intercontinental AFDs. Speedy deletion G4 was declined by an adminstrator. Dai Pritchard (talk) 14:00, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Dai Pritchard (talk) 15:19, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Dai Pritchard (talk) 15:19, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE Really don't see why this couldn't have been speedied given the history of AFDs for related articles. Mabalu (talk) 23:51, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Miss Intercontinental is definitely notable, see [1]. Quite possibly it wasn't when it was deleted in 2009, but it is now. I will probably restart the article this week. Obviously, as long as there is no general article, there shouldn't be a year one, and quite likely even after there is a generally article, year ones will not be needed/justifable. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:45, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:23, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:12, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Technically all those other AFDs in the box are related but are not the same so G4 wouldn't apply, Anywho per above no evidence of notability fails GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 03:41, 13 March 2015 (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.