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. Taking no heed in the bad faith accusation - the deletion concerns were notability and lack of evidence thereof which have been addressed and added to the article significantly improving it. With no other deletion concerns left unspoken for, the consensus is clear. (non-admin closure) Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 03:54, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Celeste Marshall[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:GNG The Banner talk 21:46, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - No evidence of notability, Only stuff I've found is Facebook related which isn't good enough. –Davey2010 • (talk) 21:48, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This nominator is making a bad faith, wholesale attempt to remove Miss Universe contestants. Each of them has achieved two events, their National win and their participation in the heavily media covered Miss Universe pageant. All of these Noms should be rejected now and the nominator The Banner should be banned from making such nominations in the future. After I'm through locating the damage this user is trying to do, I'll try to come back to add more sources, sources I know exist because they exist for all contestants of this worldwide televised, publicized event. Trackinfo (talk) 10:18, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you please stop with your personal attacks? The Banner talk 10:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree they should stop accusing anybody of bad faith actions here. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 14:56, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We have WP:Before as a guideline, ignored by this nominator on dozens of such articles. It is not rocket science to google each of these names. Major American Newspapers, otherwise known as WP:RS are doing coverage of each contestant. There is also a ton of gossip chatter. To say there is nothing but Facebook is a misrepresentation of the facts. The worldwide pageant is nothing but a publicity event centered around these contestants. For that one week, they are celebrities. For a different period of time, each of them is a national celebrity in their homeland winning the national pageant. What completely irks me is I have to spend hours of my time rescuing each of these articles separately, getting deep in a subject I care little about, because this one Nominator has spread damage in little pieces, instead of taking this subject as a whole and making one reasonable discussion. Search, copy, paste. This could have been avoided with a little effort on the part of the Nom, but apparently removing content (justified or not) from wikipedia is more important. That is bad faith. Wikipedia does not prosper with editors like this. Trackinfo (talk) 18:32, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever your dispute is, I believe, you could employ better wording. Maybe you could still ponder striking 2 or 3 words from your previous talk. That is all from me. Bye. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 19:19, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The story is coming clearer. I have now discovered there is an ongoing discussion about this subject at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Beauty pageant contestants. The nominator first participated in that discussion on September 3. This nomination was made on September 8, without associating it to the discussion, in order to sneakily try to get a deletion to make a WP:POINT. Trackinfo (talk) 19:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, my friend, you are making a WP:POINT by accusing me of all kinds of bad things. Just admit that you don't like my nominations and that you prefer personal attacks above arguments.. Despite what ever happened, I am still not convinced about her notability as notability is never inherited. The Banner talk 15:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Banner, that you have made so many AfD nominations of beauty contestant articles, none of which appears headed anywhere near deletion, suggests an anti-beauty contestant POV, and looks reckless in not doing required preparation steps as per WP:BEFORE.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Meets WP:GNG. Noms may not be bad faith; but they are bad.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 17:03, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:45, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Meets WP:BASIC. Source examples: [1], [2], [3], [4]. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:49, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. She's certainly notable in her country.SBaker43 (talk) 05:25, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Northamerica1000 and SBaker43 and Trackinfo. Still puzzling why Banner keeps rapid-fire nominating clearly notable beauty contestant articles without doing WP:BEFORE.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:21, 19 September 2014 (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.