Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Becki Ronen


 * 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. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:05, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Becki Ronen

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

non-notable &#40;&#40;&#40;The Quixotic Potato&#41;&#41;&#41; (talk) 15:07, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NEXIST and WP:NTEMP. There is more coverage available under Becki Walenz, her married name.  Jim Miller  See me 17:05, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete The sources entirely fail to meet notability standards. Being Miss something somestate is not enough to establish notability and the sources lack the depth to show she is notable otherwise.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:13, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:43, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Wrong venue or Procedural close Delete !votes have failed to establish the case (1) that a search for sources including sources in the article finds less significant coverage than an objective level that defines WP:GNG, (2) that there are no merge targets, and (3) that there are no redirect targets.  WP:Notability is not a policy, rather WP:Deletion policy; including ATD, DEL-REASON, and CONTENT; is the policy.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:02, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as, in this case, there's no signs of the substance we need, simply participating in an event is not an automatic factor of notability and the sources are only mere announcements and mentions for them; there's no automatic inherited notability from anything or anyone involved and the article shows no other signs of the needed significance. WP:NEXIST is not applicable here, because it's used when sources were otherwise shown and found, but none have been, and since the current ones are unconvincing, there's nothing else otherwise; next, WP:NTEMP is not applicable since it's used when subjects were in fact convincing, but this one isn't since it's simply mere participation. In fact, there's been no noted career achievements since then, so that's also self-explanatory. SwisterTwister   talk  06:45, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Total elapsed real-time for this contribution is two seconds (06:45:14 to 06:45:16). I wasn't able to identify any policy arguments, including a WP:DEL-REASON.  Nor do I see arguments to address the relevance of WP:Deletion policy, and WP:Deletion policy.  Unscintillating (talk) 09:33, 11 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep and possibly move to her current name, Becki Walenz. She has more notability as a trumpet player and instructor than as a former beauty queen.  Montanabw (talk) 11:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC) Some sources include:
 * https://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news/story/20013/20120810/becki-walenz-releases-new-cd-as-a-resource-for-young-trumpeters
 * http://www.hutchnews.com/news/local_state_news/buhler-grad-gets-la-trumpet-chance/article_9d222f78-7196-5d5a-9bd8-2166e8e0145c.html
 * http://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/aug14/walenz8714.html
 * http://cjonline.com/news-life-arts-entertainment-state/2014-08-06/miss-kansas-2009-appear-mark-ballas-music-video — Preceding unsigned comment added by Montanabw (talk • contribs)


 * Those are simply announcements including in local publications, that's not the significant coverage we need. SwisterTwister   talk  18:40, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia in no way denigrates local sources as non-reliable. Reliable is the key, not wide-encompassing. The Wichita Eagle and The Topeka Capital-Journal both have Wikipedia articles, as you can see. NPR affiliates are obvious. Tapered (talk) 05:36, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Consider a possible redirect to Miss Kansas § Winners as per WP:ATD-R. A valid search term at the very least. North America1000 03:03, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 22:49, 15 February 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete as a pseudo-biography filled with trivia. Nothing stands out about this contestant and such articles are routinely deleted. A redirect is unnecessary as the name is unlikely to have become a valid search term. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:17, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - searches did not turn up the type of in-depth coverage to show they pass WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 21:08, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 21:17, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Most winners of this pageant are not notable. This is one of them. The sources do not constitute more than press releases. Guy (Help!) 14:44, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:21, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Decisive Keep There are several dedicated references from WP:RS, especially The Wichita Eagle, The Topeka Capital-Journal, and NPR affiliates. Whether her notability derives in part from a Beauty contest or not, dedicated pieces from reliable sources = notability = keep. Tapered (talk) 05:11, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Dear Admins Please sift through this discussion carefully. Please note that the nomination is encompassed by one word, with no attempt to synch it with Wikipedia guidelines. It doesn't get much better after that. None of the Deleters explain how their nominal citings of Wikipedia policy dovetail with the contents of the article. The use them like talismans: 'I mention this in connection with this article, so that means what I'm saying is so.' Other Deleters, in effect, say, 'I don't like this article, out with it.' There's a cultural condescension toward Beauty contests and their entrants at work here. Please don't take this as even a tacit endorsement of said contests. It's simply a plea for intellectual honesty in the matter of this article and Wikipedia's notability guidelines, which I see as absent in much of the above verbiage. Tapered (talk) 05:11, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


 * 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.