Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rashontae Wawrzyniak (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 redirect to Miss Michigan USA. Arguments in favor of deletion are generally stronger. (non-admin closure) SST  flyer  02:45, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Rashontae Wawrzyniak
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The fact that this article plagued with "citation needed" and having no reliable sources at all, just a listing to IMDb (totally not reliable) and to whatever hometownlife is, can survive one deletion nomination and a reasonable redirect request just shows how flawed in favor of articles on totally unnotable people Wikipedia is. Wawrzyniak is a totally unnotable individual. Having an article on her is a total waste of space and computer storage. John Pack Lambert (talk) 08:17, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:03, 27 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete -- an unsourced WP:PSEUDO BLP on a non-notable individual. State-level pageant win is a BIO1E and does not add to subject's notability. Add: the fact that Ms Wawrzyniak was quoted in the press is a trivial mention and lacks WP:PERSISTENCE. Further, Wikipedia is not WP:NEWS, but requires a balanced biography, which I do not see here. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:04, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:44, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:44, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:48, 1 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Miss Michigan USA as a valid search term, and the subject is mentioned there as the 2015 winner. North America1000 10:48, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep All claims of WP:BIO1E against almost all beauty pageant winners are invalid. They win a State or National title, then, separately go on to compete at the next higher level.  Equate this to WP:NSPORT where every athlete has to qualify at their preliminary level before going to a major competition.  In this case she won Miss Michigan and then competed in the Miss USA.  Additional to her case, she also has a credited role in a major motion picture,  Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and was quoted in the New York Times supporting Donald Trump after the network coverage for her pageant was cancelled due to his racist comments about Mexicans while announcing for president. Trackinfo (talk) 08:52, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  19:04, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment -- IMO, WP:BIO1E exactly applies. The state level winners may be notable for their state level win; but they are not notable for competing in the next level pageant, if they do not win. Miss America or Miss USA are not the Olympics :-). K.e.coffman (talk) 00:22, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment One of the keep votes above says "she had a credited role in Batman v. Superman:Dawn of Justice". Her role is listed as "beautiful woman". Having watched that film twice, that description gives me no clue as to where she appeared in the film. It is an extreme bit part. Not at all the stuff notability is made from. The Detroit Free Press article this is sourced from basically is "look, some local people are in a top billed film." Nothing in that references works towards notability. Especially since the mention to Wawrzyniak was a rushed one line mention even in the Free Press article. Also, being quoted in the NYT or anywhere else is not a sign of notability. What is needed to suggest passing GNG is indepth coverage, not a passing quote.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:01, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * While it was not a big role, it was meritorious of being credited and you have admitted that yourself. Trackinfo (talk) 20:46, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  20:23, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Being "meritorious of being credited" is not at all any standard for inclusion of a person in Wikipedia, so I do not have to admit anything. I have zero memory of what her role was, so I don't have to admit anything. Actually, more to the point, the description tells us nothing. Having a the role as a character who lacks a name is almost universally a sign it is a very minor part. Having watched the film twice I know this is not an exception. Our notability guidelines say we need "significant" parts, which are almost never unnamed roles, not just "credited" roles. The only sources I could find on this were the Free Press article which is full of people whose role in the film is truly minor, and yet Wawzyniak gets even less coverage than the others, and IMDb, which is not a reliable source, and explicitly called a non-reliable source by our guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:37, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * There is an RFC with possible implications for this article here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Beauty_Pageants.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:53, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as the nomination is exact with saying why and how this article is a concern and how there's no inherited notability in and of itself of simply participating at a beauty pageant, therefore there's no presumed basis we should automatically keep this simply because of the beauty pageant events or awards themselves. SwisterTwister   talk  07:16, 16 September 2016 (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.