Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Teen America

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 I wouldn't quite go as far as to say "nom withdrew", but the nominator certainly changed her mind here. Consensus is to keep anyway, particularly when one of the Deletes has "strong cleanup" as another option. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 03:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Teen America (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Article describing a non-notable pageant. The event is not televised and is on a far lesser scale than Miss Teen USA and, I think, even Miss America's Outstanding Teen (although the latter is a new pageant, it's ties to the Miss America pageant make it more notable than most of its predecessors. Having titleholders that either previously held other titles or went on to win titles does not convey notability. -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 22:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC) Weak Keep, expand & reference After looking on Factiva and seeing the links Oakshade has provided I will admit that the pageant is somewhat notable (although comparing "Miss Teen America"'s paltry 250ish hits on Factiva compared to "Miss Teen USA"'s 3400 kind of proves my point (especially considering it is likely that not all of those hits are actually directly related to the pageant because of the naming issue I highlighted below). However, I guess there is room to expand and improve the article so am changing my vote. One question... why does the article not list all the winners, as it appears the pageant was running from the 80s? -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 20:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete without prejudice to recreation on grounds that the current article doesn't say anything encyclopedic about the topic. There is essentially nothing salvageable in the current article, so deleting is appropriate. —Doug Bell ^talk 22:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and fix up, delink winner names. Results 1 - 10 of about 18,300 for "Miss Teen America". (0.07 seconds) and there are three article in Google News. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 01:23, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the problem with Ghits is that often pageants are confused where they have similar sounding names. "Miss Teen America" is often used as a generic name for any teen pageant in America (it is most commonly mixed up with Miss America's Outstanding Teen)... if you checked out the GNews links... one relates to a 1970s spoof on a pageant titled "Miss Teen America", one is valid (about a state pageant for the Miss Teen America system calling for applicants) and the third incorrectly uses the Miss Teen America title when in fact they're talking about the Miss America's Outstanding Teen pageant. I would suggest you take a look at the first few pages on Google before you start suggesting that the number of ghits make this notable. -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 02:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete or Strong Cleanup per Doug Bell. Maybe it's notable, maybe it's not, but the article doesn't cite whatever notability it may or may not have (unless one counts the one footnote that, somehow, doesn't actually link to a footnote). I'm willing to accept that this may be a known and influential pageant in the beauty pageant world, but it needs to be verified, not asserted. -Markeer 13:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Quarl ^(talk) 09:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep There are numberous published works about either the Miss Teen America pageant or people who have the works written about them because they are Miss Teen America, and from extremely reliable souces too boot, like the Washington Post [1] [2]. Here are some others - [3] [4][5] We might not care for such a constest (I certainly don't), but WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a reason to delete an article on a notable subject. --Oakshade 18:03, 26 February 2007 (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.