Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joanna Candelaria


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 02:13, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Joanna Candelaria

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Minor state-level beauty-pageant winner. No other actual accomplishments, only a few local media references. Four from this group have already been considered by AFD (Holly Shively, Annilie Hastey, Sommer Isdale, and Kari Schull) and their deletions upheld at deletion review. PROD tag added, but removed by the article creator User:PageantUpdater with the comment remove prod by an imbecile trying to prove a WP:POINT, so here we are. Calton | Talk 05:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, This article has a number of references, so obviously the subject is notable. The article should be considered on its own terms, not in light of other afd discussions relating to articles with fewer references.  See also my comments on the talk page.  The fact that there are a number of local references doesn't remove the fact that the article meets WP:BIO. PageantUpdater 05:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * And I have a feeling I'm going to have to reiterate this point: please, please be objective when considering this and don't let any prejudicial thoughts against beauty pageants or your ignorance about the relevance of beauty pageants to cloud your judgment on this one. Candelaria won the most important Teen beauty pageant title in Florida and reigned as Miss Florida Teen USA for one year, making appearances throughout the state.  Part of this included representing her state at the nationally televised Miss Teen USA pageant broadcast throughout the United States.  I know Calton will claim that I'm claiming to own the article, but I myself am trying to be objective: many of the other articles were either poorly sourced or had no sources and though I argued to keep them, I now agree that policy wise they didn't meet the requirements of WP:BIO.  This article, however, does cite numerous sources and I hope people take this into account. PageantUpdater 05:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * ...numerous sources - yeah, all local media sources -- in fact, the SAME local media source, namely the Sarasota Herald-Tribune. Not exactly "multiple" under an reasonable interpretation.
 * The article should be considered on its own terms... - which would be what, exactly? The only thing you've raised is "has a number of references".
 * Even granting that, "has a number of references" =/= "notable". --Calton | Talk 05:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as notability is not inherited and per WP:BLP, which states that people do not become notable for a single event. --Nonstopdrivel 05:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment excuse me for my ignorance but can you please point me towards the section in BLP which backs up your statement? I could not find it but might not have been looking hard enough. PageantUpdater 05:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply: The relevant shortcut is WP:BLP1E, from which I will quote for your convenience: "If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event, then a separate biography is unlikely to be warranted. Marginal biographies on people with no independent notability can give undue weight to the events in the context of the individual, create redundancy and additional maintenance overhead, and cause problems for our neutral point of view policy. In such cases, a redirect is usually the better option. Cover the event, not the person." --Nonstopdrivel 05:48, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * the wording is apparently intentionally set to be flexible. Please don't re-prhrase it in such a way as to indicate that it is prescriptive.   Just a comment.DGG 16:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment exactly - this article covers the person in some detail, although it clearly could be expanded. Note the use of the word can.  PageantUpdater 06:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What "detail" is covered is almost all personal trivia, which doesn't address the claims of individual notability. --Calton | Talk 07:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 09:13, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per arguments above. --SquidSK (1MC•log) 09:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, insufficiently notable. NawlinWiki 20:53, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, insufficiently notable at this point in time. KP Botany 04:50, 30 June 2007 (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.