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 Rhode Island USA . Redirect is always preferred over deletion and consensus is to redirect the non-notables so closing as such (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 23:03, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Allison Paganetti[edit]

Allison Paganetti (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)

Paganetti won Miss Rhode Island USA which is not enough to make her notable. Her roles in the US army are also not enough to make her a notable soldier John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:53, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:01, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Rhode Island-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:01, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:ONEEVENT - Winning a state-level beauty pageant doesn't seem likely to establish notability, and that's Captain Paganetti's only claim to fame at present. Having an article on her seems to be an unjustifiable intrusion into her privacy. Nick-D (talk) 23:10, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- a state level pageant win does not qualify under ANYBIO1 (although I've seen it use in this manner, for example at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristen Johnson (2nd nomination). Coverage is all localized and not significant. My searches do not turn up anything better, except this brief mention in Forbes: "What Our Troops Miss Most About America". The subject may become more notable due to military service -- who knows? Then the article can be recreated if needed. She's not notable yet. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:42, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:06, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:06, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Miss Rhode Island USA as a valid search term, and the subject is mentioned there. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:07, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment -- the subject has been mentioned in the press in re: her military career, so a straight up redirect to Miss Rhode Island USA may not be the best option. That's why I would advocate deletion in this case. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:09, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Miss Rhode Island USA as that is the WP:ONEEVENT she is notable for . - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:14, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for now. Discussion about notability guidelines has already started on the Talk page for the Beauty Pageant project. No harm will be done by closing this nomination as "keep" and letting the project-level discussion take its course. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:08, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • A BLP on a non-notable person is actually harmful as it's an invasion of the subject's privacy, and any vandalism could lead to embarrassment to them. Notability guidelines cannot be endorsed by single projects anyway. Nick-D (talk) 06:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These are very curious arguments. By agreeing to take part in a public competition, the subject has become a "public", not a "private", person and there is no invasion of privacy. As for deleting an article because of a potential for vandalism, that argument would call for the deletion of all biographical articles on living people, and would also call for deleting all biography-related material from non-biography articles. Indeed, these are very curious arguments. NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:46, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Just because someone was a participant in a public event 12 years ago does not mean that they have become a permanent public figure.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:21, 24 August 2016 (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.