Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional beauty queens (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:23, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

List of fictional beauty queens
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:LIST and WP:FICTION, also unsourced. Sheldybett (talk) 09:52, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - unsourced, and trivial. --Spacepine (talk) 13:00, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Might not meet CSD G4, but it does not address the concerns in the previous AfD. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 20:04, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete- did not meet notability.-Richie Campbell (talk) 00:55, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.   C Thomas3   (talk) 19:55, 12 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. WP:LISTCRUFT and trivia. Ajf773 (talk) 20:08, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per the nominator's rationale. It fails WP:LIST and WP:FICTION, and seems to be rather trivial. Aoba47 (talk) 23:15, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 23:59, 12 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - wow. simply wow. Can we get any more trivial and irrelevant. Oh, wait, perhaps, List of fictional beauty kings. Onel 5969  TT me 02:18, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Couldn't find any sources discussing fictional beauty queens as a group per WP:NLIST aside from ad-supported listicles like this. It doesn't help that the article is unsourced.  Daß &thinsp;  Wölf  04:18, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clearly fails WP:LISTN. My Google search for "fictional beauty queens" and a few similar terms did not turn up any reliable sources that discuss fictional beauty queens as a set. However, I did come across Category:Fictional beauty queens, which was created by the same editor who created this list. Should this category be deleted as well as original research? – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 04:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Apologies for jumping in, but I am not sure if the category would count as original research if the characters are explicitly said to the beauty queens. I could see the category as comparable to Category:Fictional cheerleaders, Category:Fictional governesses, and Category:Fictional maids in that it helps a reader find a character by an occupation. Aoba47 (talk) 01:01, 17 August 2019 (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.