Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States House Select Committee on the House Beauty Shop


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 01:40, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

United States House Select Committee on the House Beauty Shop

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable minor congressional committee. Other than a passing reference to it in a CNN article there are no detailed sources on it; the two newspaper links appear to have been falsified (the links are broken and no record of them can be found in their respective archives). Even with sources, however, there is no indicia that this body, which existed for only a few years, was ever notable other than the mere fact that it was briefly associated with a few notable congresspersons. Michepman (talk) 04:40, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Michepman (talk) 04:40, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Michepman (talk) 04:40, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Michepman (talk) 04:40, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Michepman (talk) 04:40, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. Michepman (talk) 04:40, 10 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep The newspaper links were not falsified. I apologize for not knowing how to properly reference the newspaper archive that I used as a source. Thank you for taking the time to find the original articles and include the reference that I omitted at first. I think if you read the original articles which are now available in the references section that will support the notability of this topic. It is not as high profile as other Congressional committees but it does come up on occasion and there were multiple detailed articles which offered significant coverage it over time (both recent ones and ones from the 1960s and early 1970s). Omanlured (talk) 15:27, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:07, 11 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes general notability guidelines This is a notable part of women's history and American politics. Missvain (talk) 03:54, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep--I'm with Missvain on this one. Drmies (talk) 03:57, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't think you meant it this way at all,, but it is sort of patronizing to describe a beauty salon in a Congressional building as an notable part of women's history. This isn't the suffragettes movement or the 17th amendment, it is barely even notable for the Congresswomen who were involved with it. We would never write an article suggesting that the men's barbershops at the Capitol were important, so emphasizing beauty salons/makeup as a core part of womens history seems inappropriate. Michepman (talk) 04:07, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Women's beauty and fashion is a critical component to women's history. I'm a woman, and I don't need anyone explaining to me what is important to women's history or not. Beauty salons are a core piece of women's history and have been dating back to ancient history. Besides, this subject has been widely written about in political science and political women's history, especially when one digs into the history of the women who created it. Missvain (talk) 04:10, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * . Thank you for your response. Are there any sources backing up the claim that this topic has been widely written about in political science and political women's history? The sources in the article are very dodgy (a handful of old local news pieces and a one-sentence off-handed mention of it in a CNN article). I tried to find better sources on my own but all I could find were of equally shoddy quality. However, if there are lots of articles talking specifically about this committee in polisci or history texts then I would reconsider my position. Michepman (talk) 05:15, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Without the Beauty Shop, Congresswomen might not have equal rights as Congressmen. It was also the first and only committee women were allowed to chair. Regardless, it passes general notability guidelines. I don't have time to sit here and dig up other sources, but this is what I have and again, it shows that it passes GNG. Please note, I have a Newspapers.com advanced subscription, so some of these might not be accessible to everyone, but I assure you, they are reliable secondary sources that cover the subject significantly.
 * "Whereas: Stories from the People’s House - Wash, Rinse, and Equal Treatment" from the History, Art & Archives of the United House of Representatives
 * "Reopen Beauty Shop for House" from the Associated Press
 * A History of the Committee on House Administration, 1947-2012. Four pages devoted to the history of the Beauty Shop.
 * "House Beauty Shop." Time. 24 August 1970. pps. 30-31.
 * "Lady Legislator's Beauty Shop Is Closed To Outsiders" from the International News Service
 * "Capitol's Beauty Business" by Drew Pearson. His column was syndicated in publications across the country.
 * "The ladies change from red to black" from the The Richmond News Leader
 * "House beauty shop committee runs money making venue" and "House Beauty Shop Committee: It's 'unsubstantive' source of good news" by Frederick L. Berns - he wrote two articles for the Washington Bureau and they were nationally syndicated
 * "Letter from Catherine May to the Editor of the Yakima Morning Herald regarding House Beauty Shop Committee, 1967" held in the collection of Washington State University
 * "Former Rep. Yvonne Brathwaite Burke (D-CA) on chairing the House Beauty Shop Cmte." on C-SPAN
 * And it still exists...
 * "Congressional hair salon finds its roots" from ''The Hill - yes, the salon still exists!
 * "New Cannon Salon Aims to Beautify Capitol Hill" from Roll Call
 * "The Senate Has Its Own Longstanding, Secretive Basement Barbershop" from DCist (talks about the beauty salon)

Missvain (talk) 06:10, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Missvain has proven her argument.NotButtigieg (talk) 13:09, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - Thank you ; this is way more sources than I was able to find and I also have a Newspapers.com account haha Omanlured (talk) 14:40, 13 January 2020 (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.