Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Asia Pacific World (2nd nomination)

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. If this is a scam, or a scandal-ridden sex affair, the content of the article can reflect that. With thanks to NorthAmerica: reliable sources to prove notability (and scandal) exist. Such sources were not produced at the first AfD, hence the different result. Nominator and others are urged to improve this article based on said sources. Drmies (talk) 22:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Asia Pacific World

AfDs for this article:
Miss Asia Pacific World (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article was recently deleted in an AfD´. See nothing that has changed too make it a notable pageant. Non-notable per GNG. Scam pageant. It's Delete for me. BabbaQ (talk) 12:34, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. BabbaQ (talk) 12:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Also this. Of course, it may be that the contest is notable as a scam pageant. But I'm unsure of the ethics regarding "balance" in a case such as this. GwenChan 14:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understood the nominator to mean that the pageant "scams" the competitors - telling them it will pick up their travel tab, then refusing, not providing accomodation as promised, "dodgy" voting, refusal to hand over prizes etc. Not "scam" as in "it does not exist." GwenChan 08:32, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep because the topic passes
    WP:GNG
    , having received significant coverage in reliable sources:
  • "Bristol teenage beauty queen flees South Korean pageant". BBC News. October 19, 2011. Retrieved May 18, 2012. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  • "Sex scandal at Miss Asia Pacific World Photogenic 2011, won by a Romanian. Contestant makes shocking disclosures". Bucharest Herald. October 27, 2011. Retrieved May 18, 2012. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  • "Scandal-ridden beauty pageant organizers checking for misconduct". The Korea Times. October 21, 2011. Retrieved May 18, 2012. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
—Northamerica1000(talk) 02:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As I commented above, this may be notable purely for the scandal/scamming of contestants. But surely that isn't a particularly good basis to keep an article? GwenChan 08:32, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah Nortamerica1000, all that coverage is proof of the fact that the pageant is a scam troughout and was the reason to why the article was deleted in the first place.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Then add in more information to the article regarding this aspect of the topic. Topic notability is based upon the availability of reliable sources, and not subjective opinions about the topics themselves. Actually, the pageant appears to be scheduled to occur in 2012. When it occurs again, will it be described as a "scam"? Maybe, maybe not. If it's a "scam", what type of scam is it? Regardless, the topic has received
    WP:NOTCENSORED. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • And now I see that the original winner was dethroned then the first runner up was dethroned sop now the second runner up holds the so called title. Ridiculous.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:58, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete - I am still dubious about this pageant's notability. The subject has recieved mentions on some recent articles ([8]) and this encourages a keep from me, but overall, it's still a case of
    talk - contribs) 14:16, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I dont buy that argument. All "multiple reliable sources" only provide information about the scams of this pageant. Wikipedia should have articles on beauty pageants but only the ones with good reputation and reliable organizations. Such as
Miss Supranational that was just kept via an AfD.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:26, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
Relisted
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, →Bmusician 01:34, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. It would be nice if this article were consistent with itself. If this pageant was first held in 2011 (which I suspect is the truth), it can't be the case that "It was formerly known as ‘Asia’ or ‘Pacific’ Competition since the 1960s" (which I suspect is not the truth). --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:25, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note to closing admin: This article was deleted recently in another AfD and now it has been recreated but it is still inconsistent and does not provide any true leads to provide me comfort that the next pageant will actually be a pageant and not a true scam were judges offers girls placements for sex or similar. Its a non-pageant which no pageant site or similar ever reports on. Does not pass WP:GNG basically.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:29, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable. Miss Asia Pacific World is different from Miss Asia Pacific International.--Arielle Leira (talk) 15:36, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree non-notable pageant. Were winners are dethroned for 1 runner up and then the 1 runner up is dethroned. Ridiculous. Does not pass WP:GNG at all. Some keep arguments here are based on that the pageant could become better in 2012 but it seems that it only getting worse as the first runner up was dethroned earlier this year. That indicates that 2012 will only get worse.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:58, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - The above !vote seems to be a subjective rationale about the notability of the pageant itself in comparison to other pageants, rather than upon Wikipedia's
    WP:GNG is based upon the availability of reliable sources that are comprised of significant coverage about topics. This topic has received significant coverage in several reliable sources. Northamerica1000(talk) 18:11, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply
    ]
You are still missing the point. All those reliable sources points out that the pageant is a fraud troughout.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:32, 27 May 2012 (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/Miss_Asia_Pacific_World_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1138089179"