Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nuestra Belleza México corona al mérito winners


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 11:15, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

List of Nuestra Belleza México corona al mérito winners

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:LISTCRUFT, unsourced list of winners of an award that is not notable of its own. The Banner talk 21:59, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:06, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:07, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:07, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:10, 4 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. I thought at first this was just a list of winners of a notable pageant, but it's apparently a separate award or recognition given by the pageant to former winners. At most the fact the award exists could be mentioned in the parent pageant article, but we should probably expect secondary coverage even for that, and a standalone list of all is excessive detail either way unless it could be shown that the award is independently notable. Otherwise such awards are arguably a form of puffery for the subjects ("look at how awesome we think our past winners are") and not encyclopedic information. Note that "unsourced" is not at all a valid deletion rationale, and I'd urge the nominator to stop including that irrelevant assertion in every deletion nomination, but to consider and discuss instead whether the information can be sourced, as is expected per WP:BEFORE. postdlf (talk) 15:34, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per above commentary; I would have to concur with the "unsourced" comment too - at least show that sources HAVE been searched for. Mabalu (talk) 11:09, 9 September 2015 (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.