Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jevon King


 * 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. WP:BLP1E is not applicable to someone who purposefully sought out media attention, such as by participating in a national, notable pageant. postdlf (talk) 14:04, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Jevon King

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notable for only one event  per WP:1E. Suggest possible redirecting to  that  event. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Ascii002 Talk Contribs GuestBook 01:26, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  02:39, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. While in principle I agree with Kudpung, by precedent, a person who has won an national title in a notable pageant and will go on to represent her country in an international pageant like Miss Universe is considered sufficiently notable for such a stub article. The article in itself is basic and very appropriate. Mabalu (talk) 11:06, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  15:01, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Consensus practice has been that BLP1E is not a suitable basis for deleting the article of a person who has won a notable award or honor. (Failing the GNG could be.) The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 17:18, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Question: Is coverage of this subject truly limited to a single source? If the most we can say about this person can be reduced to a single short sentence (due to a lack of coverage from reliable third party sources) then I really question why do we have a separate article for this person at all.  Silverfish8088 (talk) 21:05, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. There seems to be a wholesale attack on the articles of individual Miss Universe contestants. Yet they all, individually receive immense courage at the pagent, which is essentially a press event.  As I started looking into this, I found major media, LA Times, Las Vegas Sun, Seattle P/I doing individual photo articles on these contestants during the patent.  Yeah, its not exactly deep investigative journalism to put pretty women in your newspaper, but it doesn't hurt the bottom line.  And there are lots of sites that devote a lot of attention to each nominee.  Her name comes up on sources of varying levels of reliability all over the world right now.  To pick on this one because the pagent hasn't happened yet is a rush technicality.  In track and field where I do the majority of my content, we have virtually unknown athletes place at the national championships qualifying them for a major international championship team.  It would be a ridiculous attack on those athletes in the interim between the qualification and the major press coverage we know they will receive at the championship.  This short sighted attack ignores what she will do later this year.  It is not WP:CHRYSTAL because by her current status, even if she were not to actually appear, she would achieve (possibly greater) notability by the coverage of her absence.  And finally, unless the NOM has some greater insight into the press coverage of Trinidad and Tobago than is otherwise stated, are we on the ground there?  What kind of national coverage is she getting, there?  Within that sphere, these are national heroes.  Wholesale, these are bad faith noms and each of these AfDs should be rejected in an equally wholesale fashion. Trackinfo (talk) 20:43, 9 September 2014 (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.