Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ummarapas Vathanakul (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 delete. Tone 14:14, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ummarapas Vathanakul

Ummarapas Vathanakul (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)

Two long RfCs in the past have both closed with total refusal to grand any beauty queen win the status of being a default sign of notability. All beauty queens need to show notability through GNG. One source can never be enough for GNG, and my search for additional sources showed up nothing that would add to notability. The last discussion appears to not have been properly posted and had no participantion, no one actually even argued for keep. There is no sign of notability at all. John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:10, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Fails
  WP:NACTOR. Dan arndt (talk) 03:27, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment: The subject does receive a considerable amount of coverage in celebrity news.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Not really high-quality or in-depth, but it does demonstrate the possibility that some of the coverage might establish notability per the GNG. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom fails
  WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Delete per nom Devokewater (talk) 21:11, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per
  WP:MILL - never actually won a major title; acting career is not substantial. Bearian (talk) 03:11, 16 July 2020 (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.