Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Washington's Outstanding Teen


 * 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. The subject of the article doesn't seem to be notable, but there is a split on whether WP:SPINOUT requires notability. It'd be better to have that discussion on WT:Article size than here. ansh 666 05:25, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Miss Washington's Outstanding Teen

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Preliminary round for Miss America's Outstanding Teen where the topic has been successfully covered for many years. Spinouts are not a move in the right direction. Merge back into the parent page. Legacypac (talk) 13:04, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:09, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:09, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:09, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:50, 10 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Redirect - Agree with nom's rationale. Not enough independent notability to warrant a standalone article. Redirecting to Miss America's Outstanding Teen should suffice, and merge any appropriate, if any, info.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:52, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect/delete Coverage consists of bios or hometown coverage of individual contestants, other mentions in passing, and affiliated sources. No notability specific to the state feeder competition. Largoplazo (talk) 19:29, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - WP:SPINOUT of Miss America's Outstanding Teen state pageants which has become far too long. Plenty of coverage in reliable sources. Nominator is currently on a deletionist rampage related to this subject matter.  --- PageantUpdater (talk) 23:58, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The sources by and large are about individual local girls, announcing that they were in the pageant, without really covering the pageant. Largoplazo (talk) 02:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, per WP:SPINOUT. If there is concern that the Miss America's Outstanding Teen state pageants article should not exist, then let that page be nominated for deletion.  But given that the article does exist, and given further that it reached a "keep" decision when nominated in 2015, it is now time to face the fact that it is becoming too large for a single article.  Spinning out separate articles for separate sub-topics is appropriate, and using "by state" as the criterion is a reasonable way to do it.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:16, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Splitting isn't the appropriate approach if the spun-out subtopics aren't notable. See where WP:Splitting still requires notability of split-out article topics:"In some cases, refactoring an article into child or sister articles can allow subtopics to be discussed more fully elsewhere without dominating a general overview article to which they are non-central (but only if the new articles are themselves sufficiently notable to be included in the encyclopedia).""Consideration must be given to size, notability and potential neutrality issues before proposing or carrying out a split. [boldfacing in the original]""Consideration must be given ... to notability of the offshoot topic ... before proposing a split. If one or more of the topics is not notable on its own, it may be more appropriate to simply remove the material from Wikipedia than to create a new article."
 * The underlying idea is that if an existing article is too large, it may mean that there's enough material to support notable subtopics, but it may also mean that the article is loaded with more detail than a Wikipedia article needs to have to cover its subject and needs a good pruning. Largoplazo (talk) 23:51, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for commenting. But WP:Splitting is a "how to" essay that really can't be used as a statement of guidance.  You'll do better by looking at the provision of WP:SPINOUT that tells us Long stand-alone list articles are split into subsequent pages alphabetically, numerically, or subtopically.  That's all that's been done here.  Also note that WP:CSC doesn't require that the entries in a list be notable, so long as it is intended to be a complete listing of the relevant people. Back when this list was included as part of Miss America's Outstanding Teen state pageants, the community accepted it (twice, at deletion nominations).  Nothing has changed, except that the parent article is getting to be too large.  As noted by others here, WP:SPINOUT is an appropriate solution to that problem.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 19:35, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding. This is a stand-alone list? It looks like a normal article with several lists within it. If it were just a list, I wouldn't have said anything.
 * Pursuing this as though this is a standard article and not a list: As for your characterization of WP:Splitting, I see what it says at the top of that page, but
 * Nowhere does WP:SPINOUT say WP:N is waived for broken-out articles.
 * WP:SPINOUT says that WP:Splitting is its own main page. So it would be weird if WP:SPINOUT didn't intend for WP:Splitting to be taken seriously, especially when it exhorts us three times that WP:N does continue to apply.
 * Food for thought. Largoplazo (talk) 20:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, per WP:SPINOUT. Could repeat the very sensible rationales of above.BabbaQ (talk) 01:33, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:SPINOUT doesn't remove the notability requirement. Do you feel that independent notability of this state feeder contest has been or can be demonstrated? Largoplazo (talk) 02:35, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete no need for areticles on sub-units of the competition.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:09, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * How?BabbaQ (talk) 06:40, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment thought I'd copy my "history lesson" from Articles for deletion/Miss Georgia's Outstanding Teen over to here as I think it is relevant. Miss America's Outstanding Teen state pageants easily passed AFDs in 2015 and 2007. At the time, the article was a lot smaller because there had been fewer titleholders crowned up to that time.  The article as it stood before it started to be split (in October, not two weeks ago) was becoming unworkably long  (169 references), and after Legacypac started (erroneously, in my opinion) started tagging it as OR there was a small discussion about splitting the article out.   then started the process.  There were two AFDs launched soon after, both of which ended as no consensus. .  --- PageantUpdater (talk) 07:38, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Ever notice how often any topic about women has an old AfD discussion tag on its talk page?  --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:44, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Ever notice how people make ridiculous and false generalizations to make a point that those generalizations wouldn't actually make even if they were true? Largoplazo (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, ridiculous. It’s perfectly normal to nominate a list for deletion even after nearly identical lists and the parent list have been nominated and kept with overwhelming support multiple times. It’s perfectly natural to want to repeat that entire process on a slightly different list. It no way indicates anything but an evenhanded dedication to principle. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:13, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Ever notice how sometimes, when you respond to what someone has written, their subsequent response to you has nothing to do with either your response or their own earlier comments that you were responding to? It feels almost as if they've realized they can't defend their earlier remark but hate to give up a good fight, so they change the subject and hope the other person keeps participating without noticing that it's no longer the same conversation. Largoplazo (talk) 20:22, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Editors keep giving you justifications for editorial discretion in keeping these lists, and you're haranguing each and every one of them that they can't escape the requirements of the notability guideline. "WP:N isn't waived!" Yet in that very guideline, WP:LISTN explicitly says that the kind of editorial discretion they cite -- WP:SPINOUT -- is valid. It says WP:LISTPURP is sufficient, even if a list looked at in total isolation wouldn't necessarily be proven notable. So what do you want? Editors post valid keep !votes, and you reply to each of them with an invalid counter argument. It's an unattractive look, and it doesn't have a SNOWball's chance of success. It invites speculation, maybe something else is going on. I speculate, is all. You should either cite a definite and valid reason why keeping a state-level Miss Teen list violates any policy or guideline, or you should (silently) defer to editorial discretion. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:06, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * As I said to New York Actuary, it never dawned on me until they mentioned it that anyone considered this a list. It looks like an ordinary article with lists at the end of it, not qualitatively different from, say, 75th Academy Awards, with an infobox and everything. What makes this a stand-alone list?
 * As for "You should either cite a definite and valid reason ...", gee, I wasn't aware that WP:N isn't a definite and valid reason. If it turns out that I was misapplying it, that's one thing, but to talk to me as though I weren't in good faith providing what I understood to be "a definite and valid reason", as though I were being oblivious to what's involved in contributing responsibly and constructively to a deletion discussionwell, .... Largoplazo (talk) 21:51, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You ought to remove your comments above claiming that others have not cited valid reasons, then. You accuse them of skirting or ignoring WP:N and that is false. The reasons they gave fall well within the guidelines. I provided you with a direct link to the text that says so. Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:32, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I still haven't seen how this is a list. Largoplazo (talk) 23:03, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, I see how the page it's been split from is a list of lists, more or less. But there's a problem when the dispensation from individual notability for lists that have been broken out from a large one is used as a pretext to turn the sublists into bona fide articles while evading the notability requirements that should then apply. Is that what has happened here? Largoplazo (talk) 23:08, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * agree, not to mention Legacypac suggested at ANI that I was "building towards a topic ban" for my comments on these AFDs.  yes it is a list.  Think of the article as both an event and the name of a specific title.  The article is a list of people who have held that title.  Does that help?  I've even changed the lede to make that more obvious (the same change was made to both the Ohio & Rhode Island Teen USA afds which closed as keep).  --- PageantUpdater (talk) 01:49, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * When you write "think of it as", it's as though you're trying to hypnotize me, to persuade me not to notice what I can see with my own eyes. The article is called "Miss Washington's Outstanding Teen". The Miss Washington's Outstanding Teen pageant isn't a list, it's an event, certainly one that one can imagine there being a full article about, whether on Wikipedia or somewhere else. The lead of the article is indistinguishable from what it would be if there weren't even a list in the article, relating what the event is, where it's held, and the name of the most recent winner. What would lead me to "think of [this article] as" a list? What quality does it possess that leads you to think of it as a list? Largoplazo (talk) 02:36, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete -- an unremarkable state-level pageant; WP:SPINOUT does not apply as the subject is non-notable. Coverage is routine and / or hyper-local, not meeting WP:AUD, as in:
 * "Miss Thurston County's Outstanding Teen Wins First Runner-Up". Thurston Talk.
 * "PAGEANT: Kennewick's Renard crowns sister as Miss Washington Outstanding Teen". Tri-City Herald. Etc.
 * The article is nothing but a list of nn winners, not meeting WP:LISTN either. In general, this is an indiscriminate amount of information that fails notability guidelines. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep I added a few additional sources to the article. It passes WP:GNG. Lonehexagon (talk) 00:12, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Articles for deletion/Miss Georgia's Outstanding Teen closed as Keep today. --- PageantUpdater (talk) 01:20, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Where the Keep voters failed to address the stated reason for nomination ie violates WP:BRANCH ams WP:CHAIN. Legacypac (talk) 01:42, 18 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment -- re: sources having been added. They don't help with notability much: . Some had to be removed as they were about a different event: "Rm sentence & references that pertain to Miss Washington County in Maryland". The article is still a list of nn contestants, and the topic, in general, fails notability guidelines. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:12, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. I invite everyone to take another look at WP:SPINOUT.  There's nothing there that requires a separate notability test when the thing being spun-out is a large list.  In cases such as we have here, the only question is whether the original list was getting too large.  And if it's too large, then WP:SPINOUT is all the justification that is needed for the sub-list.  If folks here really want the by-state pages deleted, then the only courses of action are to merge them back into Miss America's Outstanding Teen state pageants or to get that parent article deleted.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:42, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Re: when the thing being spun-out is a large list -- I don't think that's what occurred here. These were apparently created as individual pages on state-level pageants. In any case, all these articles contain are lists of nn winners: Miss_Washington%27s_Outstanding_Teen. This is a classic failure of WP:NOT. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:36, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 100% incorrect. They were initially created as individual articles but as the result of this afd in 2007 when the competitions were only a couple of years old Miss America's Outstanding Teen state pageants was created.  As I said above, and because I can't be bothered rephrasing for you since you can't be bothered reading,  Miss America's Outstanding Teen state pageants was later nominated itself and easily passed AFDs in 2007 and 2015. At the time, the article was a lot smaller because there had been fewer titleholders crowned up to that time. The article as it stood before it started to be split (in October, not two weeks ago) was becoming unworkably long [1] (169 references), and after Legacypac started (erroneously, in my opinion) started tagging it as OR there was a small discussion about splitting the article out and Mariacricket took it from there. --- PageantUpdater (talk) 04:22, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Miss America's Outstanding Teen state pageants looks to be a non-notable topic as well. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:50, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Well the results of 2 AFDs beg to disagree with you. --- PageantUpdater (talk) 05:41, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * They are non-notable winner lists. Just list the winners of the national contest on the national page and note that there is a system of feeder pageants in various states. The state winners are only participents in the national contest and should not all be listed anywhere. Cite it all. Be done. Legacypac (talk) 07:08, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I am attempting to be civil and struggling. For the nth billionth time, you're welcome to your opinion but the results of previous AFDs, most recently Articles for deletion/Miss Georgia's Outstanding Teen closed only today begs to differ. I'm not sure why you have such a personal vendetta against this topic but seriously dude, give it a krispie. --- PageantUpdater (talk) 07:30, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I have it on Articles_for_deletion/Katee_Doland reliable authority]] that state level pageant winners are not inherently notable. Therefore this is a list of non-notable winners ans should be deleted. Results of other AfDs don't establish that any reliable sources cover this event/business in depth. Generally the best that can be found is "local girl won the event" coverage. If you want pages for every state each state company needs to pass WP:NCORP or [[WP:EVENT on its own because notability is not inherited. Legacypac (talk)
 * That argument fails per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. BabbaQ (talk) 10:31, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Your point nicely sums up why we can discard every argument that this specific non notable company/business/event/title should have a page because similar ones have a page. Legacypac (talk) 19:41, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It also fails WP:CSC, which does not require individually-notable entries if the list is intended to provide an exhaustive listing of all members of the group. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:18, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * "List. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." (Apologies to The Princess Bride.) Largoplazo (talk) 19:34, 18 February 2018 (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.