Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kari Schull

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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 -- Y not? 04:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kari Schull

edit
Kari Schull (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Minor state-level beauty-pageant winner. No other accomplishments, and no 3rd-party references other than the pageant websites -- which don't even provide any real information. Part of an assembly line of 49 nearly identical "biographies" created by PageantUpdater (talk · contribs), which only vary in the trivial personal details or the addition of hometown news articles announcing that a local girl has won the state pageant. PROD tag added, but removed by User:PageantUpdater with the summary Miss Teen USA state titleholders are not "minor" and she will be competing at Miss Teen USA, a nationally televised show. No refs a valid point...will work on this. To which I say: yah, they're minor and being one of 51 contestants on a single TV program is straining for notability -- not to mention if she really were notable, references wouldn't have been an issue. For the full list, see here: {{Miss Teen USA 2007 delegates}}. Calton | Talk 01:17, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep' Schull is notable... all the contestants are notable. They all won state level titles and will compete in the nationally televised Miss Teen USA pageant. Some have more references than others (blame that on the state orgs getting their queens out there) but they are all equally notable. I am extremely aggravated at Calton's response to my suggestion that nominating all these girls at the same time is ridiculous when I suggested that one or two should be used as "test cases" rather than having to copy-and-paste the same responses to all. I have already had to deal with 6 prods and 7 more are currently still on articles... I cannot be bothered dealing with them right now.

Please read this re the notability of teens. PageantUpdater User Talk Review me! 01:56, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The Miss Teen USA pageant is notable, and Miss Teen USA state level winners are pretty notable. Thre should be numerous TV and newspaper references if someone would dig them up. Edison 03:43, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • That last part isn't a reason, it's a declaration of faith -- one unbacked by actual evidence, so far.
  • Miss Teen USA state level winners are pretty notable - Why? There are 51 of them: what makes any of them stand out, other than the ability to walk across a stage wearing a swimsuit, high heels, and a sash? --Calton | Talk 14:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment posting here what I posted at another AFD... ::Comment They are notable because they won a state title... in most cases against tough competition (up to 100 other girls, in some cases)... and in some cases having previously won a local title in order to gain entry to state). The hold their title for a year, making appearances and doing charitable work etc, as a representative of their community and state. Competing in the Miss Teen USA pageant is just a part of why they are notable. It also must be considered that the press coverage of these girls will certainly increase around the time of the pageant (so why not hold off until then?). PageantUpdater User Talk Review me! 05:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They are notable because they won a state title A meaningless distinction. What makes a "state title" here the slightest bit meaningful?
..in most cases against tough competition - what constitutes "tough competition" (are there obstacle courses involved?) and what is the slightest relevance of the "tough competition" to the actual notability to begin with? State-level spelling bees and 4-H competitions can also be described as "state titles" and "tough competition" -- probably more so than a minor beauty pageant -- but practically no one can credibly argue that the Florida state spelling bee champ deserves an Wikipedia biography for that alone, neither should these contestants.
It also must be considered that the press coverage of these girls will certainly increase around the time of the pageant - Again, not an actual argument, an article of faith aka the ol' crystal ball. Pretty much every garage band and college drinking game that shows up on AFD seems to take a stab at this one. --Calton | Talk 14:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: As contestants in a nationally televised pageant, these are obviously notable--I say "these', as there are several AFDs related to this, and don't feel like typing the same comment over and over again. Jeffpw 06:56, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • BTLizard, you stated your opinion, which is nice, but gave no reasoning to back it up. Please explain why this delegate and this event are non-notable. Otherwise, it is hard for me to take your vote seriously. This is a repost of a comment at another AFD discussion where BLT made the same comment: Comment: BTLizard, did you actually taken the time to familiarize yourself with this t\opic before you made your comments? It doesn't seem like it. If you had, you'd realize that the Miss Teen USA pageant is a substrate of the Miss Universe organization, which also oversees the Miss USA pageant and the Miss Universe pageant. To call Miss Teen USA unnotable (sic) would be to imply the same for all pageant delegates, something clearly untrue, given both the viewership for these pageants (up to 1 billion worldwide) and the controversy the pageants themselves draw from a variety of individuals. Simply participating in the event is notable...and quite honorable, if you ask me. Jeffpw 11:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete on the principle that local coverage of local events is not encyclopedic notability, no matter how many home-town newspaper articles there are. I would accept significant coverage in regional papers, or any coverage in national media. (I'm referring to subjects in general, including this one).
that the pageant winners go on to higher levels of competition and that those who win there become notable, does not make for notability of the ones who only win at the state levels; whichever one does win at the national level will be notable, but we're not trying to cover the ground with crystal balls. The above argument is an argument for notability for everyone who even enters. 00:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC)DGG
I know I'm being overly defensive, but it must be noted that regional and national coverage will increase markedly around the time of the pageant (August). I think it would be best to hold these off until after then, but of course that's not my call. PageantUpdater User Talk Review me! 01:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
...regional and national coverage will increase markedly around the time of the pageant - I repeat, not an actual argument, a pure crystal-ball article of faith. --Calton | Talk 14:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect all state delegates to a single list article. While obviously these aren't fictional characters, I think looking to WP:FICT is instructive. It suggests merging into a single list article until such time as there is sufficient notability for any particular entry to be spun off into an individual article. For the most part the information about each of these delegates is going to be the same and people interested in one are likely to have some level of interest in all of them. Otto4711 16:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I don't think that the kind of "let's make a short article and a giant photo of this teen hottie to increase circulation" media coverage these girls get makes them notable. This is an encyclopedia, our inclusion standards should be a little bit higher than those of some tabloid. Malc82 20:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not notable at all.--Svetovid 22:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I look to WP:BIO here rather than WP:FICT, since these are in fact real people. I think that these individuals most closely fall under the criteria for athletes which is basically interpreted as any player who has ever played in a MLB or NFL or NBA or NHL game or ever raced in a NASCAR race or the Indy 500 or any race in F1, or CART or Indy series, etc. is notable for inclusion. I would say that competing in a national pageant meets the same standard. Therefore, contestants in state and local pageants would not be notable, but the state winners would be notable because they complete in the national pageant. Many of these people also become more notable after the pageants as they move on to acting roles, etc. --After Midnight 0001 14:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment MLB, NASCAR etc. are leagues or series while a national beauty pageant (which isn't an athletic competition, IMO) is a one-time amateur event. The key differences here are that these athletes are professionals, meaning there is enough public interest and long-time coverage available for them, while beauty pageant contestants will usually go back to obscurity once the competition is finished. This also means that apart from their final position there's really nothing noteworthy to write about them (unless one calls being part of a school dance team notable). Malc82 14:55, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Doesn't matter if it doesn't pay. Some guys can win multiple Olympic gold medals and could be broke. The fact they have no money doesn't mean that they are lesser achievers to some guy who plays in a fourth division football team and is probably the 1000th best player in the country. Most Olympians are also ignored except for two weeks every fours years by the average Joe who watches popular sport, but "fame" /= notability. Someone may lose fame after they are not in the public view, but by your definition, George Washington is now less notable than GWB? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:33, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wasn't trying to imply that these were athletes, just that a living person comparison seemed more applicable to me than one for fictional characters. The athlete standard also specifically applies to amateur sports as noted in the guideline, so amateur vs. professional should not be a concern. There are a great number of persons who have played a limited number of games in their sport, or who have competed in only a singular golf or tennis tournament, these persons all meet the standard for notability. --After Midnight 0001 17:40, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wasn't trying to imply that these were athletes... Uh huh. So why does your analogy explicitly lean on a narrow reading of the sports-only "participating in at the highest professional-league level" criterion, as opposed to, say, WP:BIO in general? --Calton | Talk 14:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep mainly per After Midnight. I guess its a bit hard to compare Pageantry to "other sport", but it is a explicitly competitive pursuit, so I guess comparing to sport is Ok (unless this is magic cards or some champion in some computer game). So I guess that's a rough approximation. These people competed at the highest level of this competitive pursuit, which is screened widely on television, even outside of the US, and needed to pass qualification to get on. It's not like they could just walk up and get onto the TV show, they had to win state preselection first. As such, the fact that they are amateur does not matter. Many guys who have won triple Olympic gold medals in no-money sports such as swimming and Aaron Peirsol do count. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:33, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kari_Schull&oldid=1068864625"