Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mimi Jabalee


 * 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. Courcelles 23:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Mimi Jabalee

 * – ( View AfD View log )

According to WP:Athlete, an athlete can be notable if they "participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level." I don't believe that the National Physique Committee's nationals count as major international amateur competition. Add to that the fact that the NPC itself appears to be barely notable--it is recognized by the International Federation of BodyBuilding & Fitness, but that is only one of a number of international amateur bodybuilding organizations. This unverified BLP provides no evidence of the subject having achieved anything notable, and the NPC website has no searchable archive; they give results only for 2009 and 2010. No hits at all in Google News, and no reliable sources in a regular Google search. Non-notable person, unverified BLP: delete. Drmies (talk) 19:40, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - I am unable to establish that the subject is competing at the highest level of the sport. Realising that Wikipedia is an unreliable sources, National Physique Committee does indicate that it is the sole national body recognised by the International Federation of BodyBuilding & Fitness.  So the competitions are legitimate from a sports governing point of view.  However, all we have is information that she has competed nationally, with one national title (verified here).  I can find no indication of international competition.  So based on WP:ATHLETE, she does not meet the inclusion criteria.  Appealing to WP:GNG, the only significant coverage was this article published in Flex.  It's a decent source, but it's the only one I could find, so I don't see that the general notability guidelines are met either. --  Whpq (talk) 17:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: per above. I also have a couple other concerns; first, that the IFBB is not generally recognized as the "highest level" of bodybuilding, and second, that the premise that bodybuilding constitutes a sport under the aegis of WP:ATHLETE is unproven ... unlike some, I don't presume that every competitive competition is a "sport."  Therefore, the subject needs to qualify under the GNG, and I see no evidence that she does.   Ravenswing  22:33, 8 December 2010 (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.