Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Grand


 * 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. No prejudice towards somebody renominating this sooner rather than later - it really deserved a higher participation rate of non-involved editors. Daniel (talk) 02:15, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Miss Grand

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article was created to work around past deletion agreements. Miss Grand is the same as Miss Grand International, which was agreed to be deleted, and now simply redirects here. It is a non-notable international pageant. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 22:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. This article was originally created to cover the entire franchise, which is covered in-depth by independent reliable sources (see those cited in the original version), and is notable. Most of these sources are primarily about the flagship Miss Grand Thailand pageant, which appears to be more notable than its international counterpart (see my comment at Articles for deletion/Miss Grand Thailand (2nd nomination)). However, other editors have since attempted to hijack the article into covering Miss Grand International instead of properly creating a separate article. The previous AfDs did not see serious attempts at identifying reliable sources, and instead were pile-ons where participants made WP:JUSTNOTNOTABLE arguments based on the articles' perceived fancruft and promotional writing. That said, there has been plenty of English-language coverage of the international pageant, mostly focused on the controversies it's generated (The Independent, Mic.com, Khaosod English, Stuff.co.nz). There's also coverage of the pageant's support of a Myanmar contestant's anti-coup protests (The Diplomat, Khaosod English, Eleven Myanmar). While they do not go into in-depth detail about the pageant's operations, they might still constitute enough significant coverage to satisfy the WP:GNG. If this is agreed on and Miss Grand International is deemed notable, split the article into Miss Grand Thailand (supported by the original sources) and Miss Grand International (supported by more recent ones including my examples). Otherwise, purge the irrelevant content and rename to Miss Grand Thailand, so that further hijacking does not occur. --Paul_012 (talk) 06:09, 20 June 2021 (UTC), updated 09:21, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep BBC, CNN picked up news from it., What might be valid reason years ago may no longer applies. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 11:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:ORGCRIT. The sources above are not about the pageant itself, but about pageant contestants. Most of the articles are about a single controversy surrounding Miss Iceland quitting the pageant weeks before the event even took place over being told to lose weight and the subsequent backlash over social media. This isn't significant coverage of the pageant itself, but a story about fat shaming that is rather trivial and tabloid in quality. It doesn't provide any notability for the pageant, as the actual pageant itself is not even a significant part of the story (as it hadn't happened yet). The other articles are primarily about Han Lay's work as an activist (the reigning Miss Grand Myanmar), and the pageant is only tangentially connected in those stories as she is the primary subject and not the pageant. While her activism may be notable, it doesn't extend to the pageant itself. Notability is not inherited. The only other story is a controversy over a crowned winner being replaced, which is essentially routine tabloid news. So, what kind of sources would be significant coverage? Sources where the pageant as an organization is the main topic. In these sources I would expect to find detailed information like who founded it, an overview of it's history, details of its operations, etc. Those don't seem to exist in any independent sources, so for me this a clearly non-notable. On a side note, I believe a pageant as an organization is held to a higher standard of sourcing per WP:SIRS, and this clearly doesn't meet that standard. am I correct that pageants are evaluated under WP:ORGCRIT?4meter4 (talk) 03:08, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't believe this should be evaluated under WP:NCORP, it isn't an organization or company per se, it is an annual event. Probably GNG, I don't think there's an SNG covering recurring events.  HighKing++ 13:22, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I agree with you. Pageants operate under business licenses, sometimes as for profit companies and sometimes as non-profit businesses. They file tax returns. They also have business managers and full time employees. Yes their business is built around a contest, but it is still a business much in the same way film /theatre production companies are businesses or wedding coordinators are businesses. Think of it this way, events are products for event planners much in the same way pageants are products for pageant organizers.4meter4 (talk) 17:33, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: See also Articles for deletion/Miss Grand International (3rd nomination).
 * I already laid out such sources in the above linked-to discussion. For convenience, I'll quote it here again. "The subject (both the franchise and the national pageant) has been covered by multiple third-party sources, including this Positioning Magazine article about its origins, business platform, and format; this Post Today article about the competition among domestic beauty pageants; and this Isranews piece looking at the company's posted financials." --Paul_012 (talk) 06:23, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   11:12, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete In agreement with 's comments. I had never even heard of this contest until I perused through List of beauty pageants for articles I could help edit. PageantsPlanet (talk) 13:28, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * PageantsPlanet, welcome to Wikipedia. As this appears to be your first time participating in a deletion discussion, please make sure you're familiar with the Deletion policy. The WP:Guide to deletion provides more information, while WP:Introduction to deletion process may serve as a more accessible guide for beginners. In most cases, deletion discussions are determined based on a subject's notability, details of which are covered at the WP:Notability guideline. Generally, notability depends on coverage in independent reliable sources, not whether the general editor has heard of the subject (naturally, most topics covered by Wikipedia are unknown to the majority of readers until they read the article). Please also note that HighKing has not made any comments for or against deletion; he has only responded to 4meter4's earlier comment regarding the applicability of the notability guidelines. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:41, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Paul_012, thank you. I meant I'm in agreement with 4meter4's earlier Delete vote then. I misread who said what. PageantsPlanet (talk) 04:02, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep lots of international coverage, clearly meets WP:GNG. And split, as above, there is enough to support both articles now. Besides Miss Iceland, which were mentioned at the last AfD, and the ones Paul_012 points out above, which are hard for me as I can't read Thai, I found these in English, from all over the world, almost all of which only appeared since the last AfD; its coverage has now grown to qualify. To forestall any objections about "they're only writing about their local champion", even if that were a disqualifier, note that in many cases they are clearly not.
 * https://bnc.tv/miss-grand-international-crowns-first-black-winner/ Black News Channel, United States
 * https://thediplomat.com/2021/04/miss-grand-myanmar-to-speak-for-her-country-from-thailand/ The Diplomat, international (Australia, Japan, US), writing about Miss Myanmar
 * https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-56602683 BBC, United Kingdom and international, writing about Miss Myanmar
 * https://www.providencejournal.com/article/20160331/NEWS/160339882 The Providence Journal (oldest continuously-published daily newspaper in the United States; has won four Pulitzer Prizes)
 * https://www.thaipbsworld.com/two-miss-grand-international-beauty-contestants-found-infected-with-covid-19/ Thai Public Broadcasting Service about Nigeria and Kenya
 * https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2078271/two-beauty-pageant-contestants-test-positive Bangkok Post, same subject
 * https://www.philstar.com/entertainment/2021/03/28/2087583/miss-usa-first-black-contender-win-miss-grand-international-crown The Philippine Star, writing about Miss USA
 * https://www.manilatimes.net/2021/03/29/news/national/miss-usa-crowned-miss-grand-international-2020/856640/ The Manila Times, writing about the whole contest, but Miss USA won
 * https://interaksyon.philstar.com/celebrities/2021/05/07/191325/stop-the-hate-miss-grand-philippines-samantha-bernardo-urges-fans-to-focus-on-supporting-beauty-queens/
 * https://www.wmcactionnews5.com/2021/06/25/memphis-native-places-1st-runner-up-miss-grand-united-states/ WMC-TV, United States, writing about ... a runner up to a runner up!
 * https://www.khaosodenglish.com/news/crimecourtscalamity/2020/09/21/miss-grand-2020-called-ugly-and-negro-for-supporting-protests/ Khaosod
 * https://www.philstar.com/entertainment/2021/04/07/2089538/miss-myanmar-reportedly-gets-arrest-warrant-miss-grand-international-speech The Philippine Star, writing about Miss Myanmar --GRuban (talk) 16:23, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Per 4meter. Slovenichibo (talk) 05:57, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I believe I have already effectively refuted 4meter4's assertions regarding the lack of in-depth coverage, and HighKing has refuted the suggestion that WP:ORGCRIT is the relevant guideline. Do you have further arguments that better support the position? --Paul_012 (talk) 17:27, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * That is debatable.4meter4 (talk) 17:35, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Paul_012 Could you not argue with every person who disagrees with you? We've seen your argument and weren't convinced, 3 people have the right to still vote delete. PageantsPlanet (talk) 21:07, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * In your case, I saw that you were commenting from a brand new article, so I pointed out the need to make policy-based arguments. Deletion discussions are not votes. You're arguing very confidently for a new user, though. Is there a previous account that should be disclosed? --Paul_012 (talk) 00:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * "Someone disagreed with me so they must be doing something wrong." Go ahead and report me buddy, I have nothing to hide. Now stop getting personal and stop haranguing everyone who disagrees with you. PageantsPlanet (talk) 02:03, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep, I disagree per the rationale that the primary references are about a certain controversy. While there are several other events about the event, like allegation of cultural appropriation as mentioned here, stepping down of Anea Garcia as mentioned here. Also, the reasoning provided as to why the controversy about Miss Iceland would not contribute to the subject's notability, is not adequately sound. The subject passes WP:SIGCOV and WP:NCORP. Chirota (talk) 05:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:21, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep I strongly agree with Paul_012. Btw, so poor WP:IDONTLIKE are arrived there🤣. Unfortunately, AfD is not a vote poll.... So sad. 😚 VocalIndia (talk) 07:57, 14 July 2021 (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.