Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joanna Galea


 * 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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 08:30, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Joanna Galea

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability very dubious; fails WP:PSEUDO and WP:ONEEVENT. There is one RS, but it offers minimally significant coverage at best, and then only in the context of the one event, and I really don't think Miss World Malta (pop. 423,000) counts as a "well-known and significant award or honor" for the purposes of WP:ANYBIO. — swpb T 12:38, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — swpb T 12:40, 7 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: What we need is NPAGEANT.  In most cases, it seems the national winners of pageants that feed into Miss Universe are deemed adequately notable, but I don't know what the standard is for Miss World. Be nice to have an open and shut set of SNGs (suggested notability guidelines) on this.   Montanabw (talk)  01:50, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Inadequate sourcing to pass the General Notability Guideline.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:34, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment I had removed the PROD on this article. My personal interpretation is that Miss Universe and Miss World are sufficiently notable pageants. For these 2 pageants, I am willing to suggest that a participant is sufficiently notable. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:44, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Miss World Malta - I am a bit undecided on this one and I feel redirect is a good decision at the moment for the following reasons
 * It is true that the subject doesn't pass GNG. There seriously isn't enough information to have an article. However, the name is a valid search term and the subject is listed at Miss World Malta. A redirect is a good compromise.
 * There is a possibility that we may have an SNG in the near future where participants of Miss Universe or Miss World are deemed sufficiently notable. Should this article be deleted, we would lose the editing history. A redirect is a good decision here as the history remains available. If we manage to obtain consensus for an SNG or if enough sources are available in the future, this can be recreated. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:54, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malta-related deletion discussions. Lemongirl942 (talk) 12:01, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect I agree,, it is good to merge and keep edit history where there is the possibility of a need to re-examine an article in the future.  I tend to favor keeping a bluelink up when possible, even if it's a redirect.  (As they say, redirects are cheap!). And, actually, I just WP:BOLDly redirected another similarly-situated article at AfD.  Montanabw (talk)  05:04, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete -- "Miss World Malta" (pop. 400,000) represents fewer people than many states in the U.S. The subject fails GNG regardless. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:50, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak redirect to main article, otherwise not notable as stand alone article. Kierzek (talk) 16:58, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:36, 13 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. I agree with the comments from Montana and Lemongirl -- we do seem to be approaching a "tipping point" for creating a set of notability standards for these international pageants.  And until we do, the better approach (i.e., the least disruptive one) is to maintain the status quo while the community reaches a consensus on how to treat this entire class of articles.  I also note that both the nominator and one of the discussants explicitly refer to the size of Malta when stating their rationales.  If you've ever wondered how systemic bias gets created, wonder no more -- you're seeing it right here.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:41, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * We are in no way obligated to keep an article because of some as-yet-to-be-explicit discussion about the class to which it belongs; WP:GNG applies as ever. I doubt you'd make such a weak argument if you had any "keep" justification specific to this article. And yes, pageant winners of large countries are objectively more likely to be notable than those of tiny countries; beating out 400 million competitors is a thousand times more impressive than beating out 400,000. That's not bias, it's arithmetic. — swpb T 15:07, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Concur with . Even if WP:NPAGEANT existed, the notability would still have to be demonstrated via "significant coverage". In any WP:N__ guidelines a subject's notability is always presumed; it's not guaranteed. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:07, 13 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as there's still nothing else apart from the Miss World to suggest her own actual notable article. SwisterTwister   talk  20:24, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect Preserving the edit history seems worthwhile to me as well--have seen a number of discussions on this pageant question just in a short time. (But yes for now I don't see sources for independent notability.) Innisfree987 (talk) 19:44, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable. Engleham (talk) 19:25, 18 July 2016 (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.